With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the trial, several witnesses testified to the conditions of Kristin’s homes, which included roach and lice problems, animal feces, terrible odors, and general fi Worth 1999, no pet.) (determining that the evidence of neglect and a home smelling like urine was legally and factually sufficient to support termination under section 161.001(1)(D)). In addition to the filthy living conditions, Kristin continued her drug use. Even though she never did drugs around K.M.B., Kristin admitted to still having a drug problem. Therefore, the record also shows more than a scintilla of evidence to support the jury’s finding that Kristin’s continued drug use endangered the physical or emotional well-being of K.M.B. See In re W.A.B., 979 S.W.2d 804, 807 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>); see also In re B.B., 971 S.W.2d 160, 169

A: holding that evidence of admitted drug use before the birth of the children missed drug tests after removal of children and a failed drug test between removal and the final hearing established legal sufficiency of evidence to show endangerment under section 1610011e
B: holding that courts may look to parental conduct both before and after childs birth to determine whether termination is appropriate that parents conduct need not be directed at child and that danger to childs wellbeing may be inferred from parental misconduct standing alone
C: holding that abusive or violent conduct by a parent or other resident of the childs home supports conclusion that childs surroundings endanger his physical or emotional wellbeing
D: holding that evidence of continued drug use after pregnancy may be conduct which endangers a childs wellbeing under section 1610011e
D.