Opinion
2014-10-22
In the Matter of ARIANA N.T. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ana D. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Shawn H.D. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ana D. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Jayson J.T. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ana D. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Joan S.T. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Ana D. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4).
Cardillo & Keyser, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Chris Cardillo of counsel), for appellant. Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Mara E. Cella of counsel), for respondent.
Cardillo & Keyser, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Chris Cardillo of counsel), for appellant. Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Mara E. Cella of counsel), for respondent.
Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (John B. Belmonte of counsel), attorney for the children.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, SHERI S. ROMAN, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
In related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b to terminate parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from four orders of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.) (one as to each child), all dated September 3, 2013, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that she permanently neglected the subject children, terminated her parental rights, and transferred guardianship and custody of the children to the Commissioner of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court properly found that the mother permanently neglected the subject children. The petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship ( seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7]; Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 142–143, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824). These efforts included facilitating visitation, repeatedly providing the mother with referrals for mental health and drug treatment programs, and repeatedly advising her that it was necessary for her to complete such programs ( see Matter of Melisha M.H. [Sheila B.R.], 119 A.D.3d 788, 989 N.Y.S.2d 312; Matter of Elasia A.D.B. [Crystal D.G.], 118 A.D.3d 778, 779, 987 N.Y.S.2d 188; Matter of Darryl A.H. [Olga Z.], 109 A.D.3d 824, 971 N.Y.S.2d 134). Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the children's future ( seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7][c]; Matter of Nathaniel T., 67 N.Y.2d 838, 840, 501 N.Y.S.2d 647, 492 N.E.2d 775; Matter of Elasia A.D.B. [Crystal D.G.], 118 A.D.3d at 779, 987 N.Y.S.2d 188; Matter of Zechariah J. [Valrick J.], 84 A.D.3d 1087, 1087–1088, 923 N.Y.S.2d 653). Her belated partial compliance with her service plan was insufficient to preclude a finding of permanent neglect ( see Matter of Elasia A.D.B. [Crystal D.G.], 118 A.D.3d at 779, 987 N.Y.S.2d 188; Matter of Tarmara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 544, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119; Matter of Hadiyyah J.M. [Fatima D.R.], 91 A.D.3d 874, 875, 938 N.Y.S.2d 565; Matter of Megan R.W. [Connie Lynn M.], 69 A.D.3d 737, 893 N.Y.S.2d 195).
Furthermore, the Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the children to terminate the mother's parental rights and free them for adoption ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 631; Matter of Precious D.A. [Tasha A.], 110 A.D.3d 789, 790, 973 N.Y.S.2d 660; Matter of Alanda Helen M., 39 A.D.3d 859, 860, 835 N.Y.S.2d 619; Matter of Jessica Marie Q., 303 A.D.2d 512, 514, 757 N.Y.S.2d 304).