Opinion
10-18-2017
In the Matter of KE'VON K.C. (Anonymous). Forestdale, Inc., respondent; Lisette M.C. (Anonymous), appellant.
Linda C. Braunsberg, Staten Island, NY, for appellant. Rosin Steinhagen Mendel, New York, NY (Douglas H. Reiniger of counsel), for respondent. Dawn M. Shammas, Harrison, NY, attorney for the child.
Linda C. Braunsberg, Staten Island, NY, for appellant.
Rosin Steinhagen Mendel, New York, NY (Douglas H. Reiniger of counsel), for respondent.
Dawn M. Shammas, Harrison, NY, attorney for the child.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JEFFREY A. COHEN, and VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
Appeal by the mother from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Joan Piccirillo, J.), dated June 3, 2016. The order, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that the mother permanently neglected the subject child, terminated the mother's parental rights, and transferred custody and guardianship of the child to the petitioner and the Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b to terminate the mother's parental rights to the subject child on the ground of permanent neglect. After fact-finding and dispositional hearings, the Family Court found that the mother permanently neglected the child, terminated her parental rights, and transferred custody and guardianship of the child to the petitioner and the Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption. The mother appeals.
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly found that she permanently neglected the child. The petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the mother's relationship with the child. These efforts included, among other things, facilitating regular visitation between the mother and the child, providing transportation assistance to and from services and visits, regularly meeting with the mother to encourage her to comply with her service plan and successfully complete it, and referring the mother to substance abuse treatment, random drug screenings, parenting skills courses, and a mental health evaluation (see Social Services Law § 384–b[7][f] ; Matter of Amonte M. [Mary M.], 112 A.D.3d 937, 938, 977 N.Y.S.2d 90 ; Matter of Corey S. [Angel S.], 112 A.D.3d 641, 642, 975 N.Y.S.2d 906 ; Matter of Tarmara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 543, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119 ; Matter of Jewels E.R. [Julien R.], 104 A.D.3d 773, 773, 961 N.Y.S.2d 248 ; Matter of Darnell G. [Robin Denise H.], 88 A.D.3d 789, 790, 930 N.Y.S.2d 908 ). Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the future of the child (see Social Services Law § 384–b[7][c] ). The mother lacked insight into the reasons for removing the child from her care, and she failed to benefit from the services offered to her (see Matter of Alysa R.S. [Marie R.S.], 141 A.D.3d 532, 532–533, 35 N.Y.S.3d 260 ; Matter of Janaesha J.E. [Monasha A.B.], 137 A.D.3d 908, 909, 27 N.Y.S.3d 177 ; Matter of Kira J. [Lakisha J.], 108 A.D.3d 541, 968 N.Y.S.2d 566 ).
Furthermore, the Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the child to terminate the mother's parental rights (see Matter of Anthony R. [Juliann A.], 90 A.D.3d 1055, 937 N.Y.S.2d 72 ; Matter of Zechariah J. [Valrick J.], 84 A.D.3d 1087, 923 N.Y.S.2d 653 ; Matter of Teshana Tracey T. [Janet T.], 71 A.D.3d 1032, 896 N.Y.S.2d 470 ; Matter of Desire Star H., 202 A.D.2d 582, 584, 609 N.Y.S.2d 268 ). Termination of parental rights will free the child for adoption, providing him with the opportunity to have a permanent family (see Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 590 N.Y.S.2d 60, 604 N.E.2d 122 ; Matter of Zechariah J. [Valrick J.], 84 A.D.3d at 1088, 923 N.Y.S.2d 653 ).
The mother's remaining contentions are not properly before this Court.