Opinion
January 18, 1996
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.).
Unrefuted evidence, including respondent's extensive medical history revealing a chronic, degenerating mental condition, frequent hospitalization, and a failure to adhere to any treatment plan, and the conclusion of the court-appointed psychiatrist that there was no possibility of improvement in the foreseeable future, constitutes clear and convincing evidence that respondent is presently and for the foreseeable future unable to provide proper and adequate care for her children and warrants termination of her parental rights pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b (4) (c) ( see, Matter of Belinda S., 189 A.D.2d 679, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 706; Matter of Vera T., 80 A.D.2d 511, affd 55 N.Y.2d 1028). The court's disposition committing guardianship and custody of the children to petitioner was soundly based on their best interests ( see, Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147-148). Nor does the record show ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsel's decision not to offer evidence or delve deeper into respondent's participation in a treatment program and the number and quality of her visits with the children cannot be judged with the advantage of hindsight ( People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147). Indeed, the doctor and the social worker were questioned on these subjects, and further questioning might well have redounded to respondent's disadvantage. Counsel exhibited "`reasonable competence'" ( Matter of De Vivo v Burrell, 101 A.D.2d 607, 608).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Rubin, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.