Opinion
2015-05-13
In the Matter of ESSENCE L.M. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Eddy M. (Anonymous), et al., appellants.
Janessa M. Trotto, Holbrook, N.Y., for appellant Eddy M. Susan A. DeNatale, Bayport, N.Y., for appellant Precious H.
Janessa M. Trotto, Holbrook, N.Y., for appellant Eddy M. Susan A. DeNatale, Bayport, N.Y., for appellant Precious H.
Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Randall J. Ratje of counsel), for respondent.
Gail Jacobs, Great Neck, N.Y., attorney for the child.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, and JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.
Appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (David Freundlich, J.), dated February 28, 2014. The order of fact-finding and disposition, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that the mother and father permanently neglected the subject child, terminated their parental rights, and transferred the guardianship and custody of the subject child to the Suffolk County Department of Social Services for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
To establish permanent neglect, there must be clear and convincing proof that, for a period of one year, or 15 out of the most recent 22 months, following the child's placement with an authorized agency, the parent failed to substantially and continuously maintain contact with the child or, alternatively, failed to plan for the future of the child, although physically and financially able to do so, notwithstanding the agency's diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship ( seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7][a]; Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 142–143, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824; Matter of Sheila G., 61 N.Y.2d 368, 380–381, 474 N.Y.S.2d 421, 462 N.E.2d 1139). With respect to the threshold issue of whether the agency exercised diligent efforts, “[t]hose efforts must include counseling, making suitable arrangements for visitation, providing assistance to the parents to resolve or ameliorate the problems preventing discharge of the child to their care and advising the parent at appropriate intervals of the child's progress and development” ( Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d at 142, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824; seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7][f]; Matter of Hailey ZZ. [Ricky ZZ.], 19 N.Y.3d 422, 429, 948 N.Y.S.2d 846, 972 N.E.2d 87). “At a minimum, planning for the future of the child requires the parent to take steps to correct the conditions that led to the child's removal from the home” ( Matter of David O.C., 57 A.D.3d 775, 775–776, 870 N.Y.S.2d 389; see Matter of Nathaniel T., 67 N.Y.2d 838, 840, 501 N.Y.S.2d 647, 492 N.E.2d 775; Matter of Leon RR, 48 N.Y.2d 117, 125, 421 N.Y.S.2d 863, 397 N.E.2d 374; Matter of Jonathan B. [Linda S.], 84 A.D.3d 1078, 1079, 923 N.Y.S.2d 638).
Here, contrary to the appellants' contentions, the petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the relationship between the parents and the subject child ( see Matter of William Z. [Millie A.S.], 123 AD3d 937, 938, 999 N.Y.S.2d 137; Matter of Walter D.H. [Zaire L.], 91 A.D.3d 950, 951, 938 N.Y.S.2d 567). Despite these efforts, the appellants failed to plan for the future of the child during the relevant time period ( see Matter of William Z. [Millie A.S.], 123 A.D.3d at 938, 999 N.Y.S.2d 137; Matter of Jewels E.R. [Julien R.], 104 A.D.3d 773, 773, 961 N.Y.S.2d 248; Matter of Jonathan B. [Linda S.], 84 A.D.3d 1078, 923 N.Y.S.2d 638; Matter of David O.C., 57 A.D.3d 775, 775–776, 870 N.Y.S.2d 389).
Moreover, the Family Court properly determined that termination of the appellants' parental rights, rather than entry of a suspended judgment, was in the child's best interests ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 631; Matter of Hason–Ja M. [Kiladi M.], 124 A.D.3d 894, 998 N.Y.S.2d 920; Matter of Amonte M. [Mary M.], 112 A.D.3d 937, 938–939, 977 N.Y.S.2d 90; Matter of Precious D.A. [Tasha A.], 110 A.D.3d 789, 790, 973 N.Y.S.2d 660).