Baby taken by TX CPS for two years after parents deemed to be “on the autistic spectrum”

When Texas Child Protective Services removed newborn Rose from her parents’ care in January 2024, they cited concerns that her parents were not “mentally capable” of caring for her. A month earlier, a hospital worker had called CPS after medical providers, based on casual observations and without any sort of assessment, repeatedly labeled the parents as “apparently both on [the] autistic spectrum.”

Neither the doctors or CPS conducted any assessment for autism or provided any services or accommodations based on that theory. 

Ostensibly, CPS claims that the removal was necessary because Rose’s weight gain was struggling and the parents were not feeding her properly. But hundreds of pages of medical and court records tell a more complicated story. 

During a one-month period prior to Rose’s removal, CPS and doctors appeared hyperfixated on every ounce of Rose’s weight fluctuation. Yet, after CPS removal, Rose’s weight percentile rankings continued to fall for the next two years under state custody. 

Nevertheless, within weeks of Rose’s removal, CPS and medical providers began describing her weight as “doing well,” “thriving,” and “not concerning”–despite her weight rankings repeatedly falling below where they had been in her parents’ care. 

That rhetorical reversal—combined with the same repeated descriptions of Rose’s parents as “slow,” “developmentally delayed,” or as being on the autistic spectrum—is now the subject of a federal civil-rights lawsuit alleging violations of parental rights and unconstitutional discriminatory treatment.

It has now been two years since Rose was taken by the state. CPS is no longer working to reunite her with her parents. Instead, the agency has officially shifted its goal toward non-relative adoption and has requested that the court block all visits between Rose and her parents. 

On February 6, 2026 a hearing will be held in the CPS case, where Joel and Donelle will have one final chance before trial to petition the court for Rose’s return. 

Given their complicated situation, Joel and Donelle reached out to Family Freedom Project. FFP leveraged its network of defense attorneys and civil litigators, compiling a team to defend the family, reunite them with their daughter, and file a federal civil rights lawsuit against CPS and several medical providers. 

Seeking Medical Help 

Rose was born in October 2023. From birth, hospital records reflect heightened attention not only to her feeding, but to her parents themselves. Notes from December 2023 reference social services involvement at the time of birth due to “concerns about parents as caregivers due to the apparent autistic spectrum disorder in both.” 

When Rose was born, Joel and Donelle actually sought out and completed parenting classes to help them prepare for parenthood. 

In November of 2023, Rose began having difficulty eating. Joel and Donelle took her multiple times to the pediatrician’s office for advice–the same pediatrician who had seen Rose at birth. 

Then, in December of 2023, Rose’s weight rankings dipped below the 10th percentile. There are many factors in a child’s weight and being high or low on the weight charts does not, by itself, indicate either good health or poor health. 

On December 11, Joel and Donelle took Rose to Hendrick’s Medical Center in Brownwood, Texas. That visit marked a turning point. The records note a concern that both parents appeared to be on the autism spectrum, and then again repeatedly describe both parents in derogatory terms as “slow”, “developmentally delayed”, or “lower functioning.”

CPS Intervention

On the second day in Hendrick’s Medical Center, a report to CPS was called in. 

CPS very quickly became a fixture in the family’s life. Hospital staff documented multiple times that the parents were able to follow feeding instructions. Yet attention increasingly shifted toward a focus on the parents’ perceived mental capacity. One doctor reported to CPS that he had “concerns about parents’ competency” and asked CPS to ensure that a “competent adult” was checking in on Rose daily. 

But at no time did any doctors or CPS conduct any assessment for autism or provide any services or accommodations based on that theory. 

After Rose was released to go home on December 16, CPS instructed Joel and Donelle to obtain 24/7 supervision–requiring other adults in their life to watch their every move with Rose at all times of the day and night and to help keep detailed logs of her feedings. 

Throughout December, Rose’s weight percentile rankings fluctuated around the 10th percentile. A child in the 10th percentile on the weight charts would be heavier than 10% of children her age, and lighter than 90% of children her age. Medical records for Rose show frequent weight checks, formula changes, and feeding adjustments—all at the direction of healthcare providers. When weight gain lagged, the parents returned as instructed. But weight lags of even a single ounce were quickly registered as evidence of the parents’ inability to care for their child. 

Yet, the records also reflect the parents’ frustration with medical providers who they felt were not addressing Rose’s needs. In late December, they brought Rose to Cook Children’s Medical Center, telling the doctors there that other medical providers “aren’t doing anything.”

At Cook’s, clinicians documented that Rose remained small—around the 9th percentile—but noted she was alert, hydrated, and not in distress. They concluded she did not meet the criteria for inpatient admission. Cook Children’s doctors switched Rose’s formula again, noted several potential medical explanations for her poor weight gain that could warrant further investigation, and sent her home with instructions that she see her primary care physician often for checkups.

Back at home, CPS repeatedly pressured Joel and Donelle to maintain adult supervision at all times of the day and night, something Joel and Donelle informed them was impossible because no one they knew could make that commitment. The agency later cited this as evidence of their inability to care for Rose.  

Removal

From January 3-8, 2024, Joel and Donelle took Rose back to Hendrick’s Medical Center because they felt she was still struggling to eat well. On January 4, the hospital noted again that the “Parents [are] apparently both on [the] autistic spectrum.” Again, no assessments of any kind were conducted.

On January 8, Rose was discharged. The discharge summary is explicit: medical testing was normal; Rose had fed well; and providers believed the parents were capable of following feeding instructions at home. Simultaneously, they expressed concern about the “situation at home”, stating that “a change in home situation is necessary for Rose to thrive.”

The next day, January 9, Rose was seen again for a regular checkup. In CPS documents filed with the court, the agency records that it “​​learned that Rose dropped an ounce last night.” That same day, CPS filed a petition with the district court alleging that Rose was in “immediate danger” and seeking approval for her immediate removal from Joel and Donelle. 

The request was granted. 

At the first court hearing on January 25, 2024, no testimony was taken. No medical records were discussed. Instead, CPS framed the case to the court as a simple situation where CPS merely needed to “train” the parents on proper feeding techniques, and then they could have their daughter back. The entire hearing took 15-30 minutes. 

Joel and Donelle were both given court-appointed attorneys. Relying on CPS’s stated intent to reunify Rose with her parents after some simple “training”, the attorneys recommended to Joel and Donelle that they not fight the removal. They could just complete some simple classes, get their daughter back, and CPS would be out of their lives. 

Based on this recommendation, Joel and Donelle agreed. That was two years ago. 

The Aftermath

A final trial is scheduled for March 30. CPS is now seeking court authorization to adopt Rose out and to block all visits with Joel and Donelle. 

In November of 2023, Joel and Donelle sought medical help for their newborn daughter when they saw her having trouble feeding. Now, a little more than two years later, they face the prospect of never seeing her again. 

CPS still attempts to justify its actions with vague references to weight concerns. However, hundreds of pages of records show that for two years the agency has been repeatedly dishonest with the court about the true nature of Rose’s weight trends, and has gradually shifted the narrative to focus on how she is “bonding” with her temporary caregiver. 

The prospect of being reunited with Rose has been repeatedly dangled and withdrawn, often following brand new allegations that arose just in time to prevent reunification, but which were quietly dismissed and discarded later by CPS. 

For Joel and Donelle, the process itself has been a perverse punishment. If you ask them today, they will tell you that they never imagined that seeking help for their daughter could come at such a high cost. 

______________

End Note: This is part one in a three-part series about the unlawful removal of Rose from her family. Part two is scheduled to be published next week. Some names have been changed to protect identities.

The next part in our three-part series about CPS’s unwarranted removal of Rose from her family

In the month before removal, Rose’s weight was repeatedly framed as alarming while she was in her parents’ care. During this time, her weight averaged the 10th percentile, which means that she was heavier than 10% of girls her age. Throughout this ordeal, both before and after the removal, Rose’s parents never stopped asking, even at times begging, for doctors to look into a medical reason for their child’s perplexing weight fluctuations.

After removal, Rose’s weight percentile rankings continued to fall for the next two years under state custody. Texas privatized its foster care system several years ago. So when Rose was removed, purview over the case was given to the private company that contracts to run the foster care system in that area. 

In repeated reports to the court and in testimony, these CPS contractors continually described Rose’s weight in state custody as “doing well,” “appropriate,” and “not concerning.” In one 2024 filing, a medical provider described a “history of failure to thrive” but stated that Rose was now “on the growth charts and developmentally doing well”, despite recorded weight percentiles remaining in the single digits.

This pattern continued for more than a year and a half. Under CPS care, Rose continually registered weight percentiles in the single digits. CPS contractors presented her to the court as “thriving.” Joel and Donelle worked through and completed each of the services CPS contractors gave them, including parenting classes and therapy. But reunification with Rose was somehow always just out of reach. 

At each hearing, CPS contractors provided updated reports claiming that, in their  opinion, Joel and Donelle just weren’t ready yet. Meanwhile, Rose was reportedly  “bonding” with her caregiver and growing and developing on schedule. 

Hopes Kindled, and Dashed

In July of 2025, after a year and a half of running on the proverbial treadmill with no acknowledgement of their progress on the service plan, Joel and Donelle’s court-appointed attorneys managed to negotiate a “monitored return” agreement. This allowed Rose to go home, but under strict CPS and court supervision.

After a year and a half of separation, Joel and Donelle believed that the nightmare was finally drawing to a close. They were reunited with Rose, even if it was under the watchful eye of the system. They breathed a cautious sigh of relief. But it didn’t last long. 

On October 7, 2025, Joel and Donelle’s court–appointed attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case, asking for Rose to be permanently left in their care and for CPS to cease any further action in the family’s life. The very next day, the caseworker assigned to Rose filed an affidavit with the court asking for an emergency removal of the child  from the monitored return. On November 10, the judge signed the order to disrupt the monitored return, and Rose was traumatically removed from her parents a second time. 

In the request for removal, the caseworker gave her statement as to the claimed emergency: she outlined concern with various tasks that the parents had allegedly not completed to her satisfaction and documented a surprise visit she had made to the parents’ home, where she found it to be too dirty for her liking. The caseworker also described clashing with extended family members who objected to CPS’s ongoing involvement in the family. 

Yet, at the October 14 hearing following the removal, the narrative again returned to weight concerns. 

Records show that Rose had already fallen to her lowest weight rankings ever recorded before she reentered her parents’ care on July 30, 2025. Nevertheless, at the hearing on October 14, after CPS took Rose from her parents a second time, the CPS caseworker testified that when she went to pick up Rose, she quickly ate the snacks and drinks provided to her. 

On this basis, the caseworker speculated that Rose was “not being fed properly.” Subsequent court filings and testimony show that the CPS contractor immediately began describing Rose’s weight as positive again once she was no longer in her parents’ care.

Shifting Blame

Analyzing Rose’s overall weight trends since the date her parents first sought medical help provides a stark contrast to CPS’s original emergency narrative, as well as to their ongoing claims that Rose does better in state care. 

The sole exception to CPS’s narrative that Rose’s weight was improving came when CPS told the court that Rose’s weight had suffered during her two-month monitored return to Joel and Donelle in the summer of 2025. 

Unmentioned was the fact that when CPS had dropped Rose off with Joel and Donelle in July of that year, she was already at the lowest weight percentile ever recorded. 

This impossible contrast between Rose’s consistently low weight rankings in CPS custody and the state’s consistently misleading narrative to the court unveils a darker side to the case, which is now the subject of the lawsuit filed by Joel and Donelle’s civil rights attorney: That Rose was not taken or kept by CPS because of a medical emergency, but rather because the state viewed Joel and Donelle’s perceived autism spectrum status as making them unfit to raise their daughter. 

______________

End Note: This is part two in a three-part series about the unwarranted removal of Rose from her family. Part three is scheduled to be published soon. Some names have been changed to protect identities.

Rose Part 3: A Destructive Game

The final installment in our three-part series about CPS’s unwarranted removal of Rose from her family

During Rose’s time in state custody, Joel and Donelle found themselves in a state of perpetual limbo—one in which reunification was always promised, but never honestly pursued.

CPS placed a growing list of requirements on Joel and Donelle: parenting classes, counseling, therapy, psychological services, supervised visitation–all of which required extensive travel. They were required to submit to drug testing, despite having never been accused of using drugs by CPS or anyone else.  

Very quickly, the case shifted away from a few classes on infant feeding and into a bureaucratic insistence on compliance with CPS demands. Every CPS update to the court ended the same way: Joel and Donelle were still “not ready.” 

This pattern unfolded alongside a striking contrast with how CPS discussed Rose’s well-being depending on who was caring for her. When she was initially removed, Rose was placed with a “temporary” caregiver, where she would remain for most of the next two years. 

The caregiver, although not a blood relative of Rose, had married an extended family member of Donelle’s, making her an easy place for CPS to leave Rose.

CPS reported often how Rose was “bonding” with the new caregiver. To Joel and Donelle, this gradually became cause for serious concern. Despite regular visitation and continued compliance, they watched Rose grow more familiar with her caregiver while their own role in her life remained tightly controlled.

By the fall of 2024, court filings show something disturbing beginning to take place. During a medical visit that October, the medical records show the temporary caregiver informing doctors that Joel and Donelle’s rights to Rose had been “terminated”. She claimed that she was in the process of adopting Rose. 

Both claims were false. Indeed, at the time, the state’s official goal in the case was still recorded as family reunification. 

Friends and family close to the situation began informing Joel and Donelle that Rose was no longer being called by her given name, and was instead responding to a new name given to her by the caregiver. One family member told Joel and Donelle that the caregiver had taken Rose to the courthouse to try to have her legal name changed.

Then, in the summer of 2025, the situation dramatically escalated. Rose was scheduled to begin unsupervised visits with Joel and Donelle on July 9 in preparation for a full monitored return of Rose to their care. CPS would maintain strict supervision under the monitored return, but the temporary caregiver would no longer have Rose. 

On July 3-4, Joel and Donelle were given two supervised visits with Rose at a hotel. Rose returned to her temporary caregiver both evenings. Everything seemed to have gone well. But on Sunday, July 8, one day before the unsupervised visits for the monitored return were scheduled to begin, the temporary caregiver made more false accusations against Joel and Donelle.  

Both CPS and law enforcement quickly dismissed the false allegations, but not before using them as a justification for delaying and disrupting the monitored return just hours after it had begun. Of note, nothing happened to the caregiver who made the false allegations.

After the disruption, the monitored return did not begin until July 30, 2025. To Joel and Donelle, it was a light of hope for Rose to return home, even if it was under strict CPS supervision. 

But that return too was ultimately disrupted again on October 9, one day after Joel and Donelle’s attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case. In what seemed to have become a pattern, Joel and Donelle discovered that, yet again, brand new allegations of abuse had been filed against them. So on October 9, the monitored return was disrupted for a second time and Rose was removed again from Joel and Donelle. 

CPS later sent Joel and Donelle official letters stating that no evidence was found to substantiate these new allegations, and the investigation had been closed. But CPS notably did not seek to return Rose to her parents based on this fact. 

Instead, CPS updated its records with the court to show that it was no longer seeking to reunify Rose with her parents at all. It was now planning to adopt her out. 

In December 2025, Family Freedom Project became formally involved in the case. FFP Senior Fellow Chris Branson filed his motion to appear as counsel. In January attorney Ashley Thompson joined the family’s legal team, filing a civil rights action against CPS and numerous medical professionals, arguing that Joel and Donelle’s treatment by CPS and medical staff–and Rose’s ultimate removal–was never based on a medical emergency, but rather on a belief that Joel and Donelle were on the autism spectrum and were not qualified to raise Rose. 

On Friday, February 6, a hearing will be held in Joel and Donelle’s CPS case. The complexity of the case has required the expansion of the defense team.  Attorneys Chris Branson and Shelly Troberman will defend Joel and Donelle at the hearing, along with Parent Advocate Krista Mcintire and defense consultants Judy Powell and Johana Scot.

This hearing will likely be the parents’ last opportunity before the final trial to demand Rose’s return. FFP is currently working with the legal team to prepare the family’s defense and to hold CPS accountable for two years of falsehoods to the court, as well as the baseless separation of Rose from her family. 

_____________

End Note: Some names have been changed to protect identities.