Opinion
12-01-2016
In re Mia VERONICA B., and Another, Dependent Children Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Brandy Veronica R., Respondent–Appellant, Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau, etc., Petitioner–Respondent.
Law Offices of Randall S. Carmel, Syosset (Randall S. Carmel of counsel), for appellant. Joseph T. Gatti, New York, for respondent. Karen Freedman, Lawyers for Children, Inc., New York (Shirim Nothenberg of counsel), attorney for the children.
Law Offices of Randall S. Carmel, Syosset (Randall S. Carmel of counsel), for appellant.
Joseph T. Gatti, New York, for respondent.
Karen Freedman, Lawyers for Children, Inc., New York (Shirim Nothenberg of counsel), attorney for the children.
Order of fact-finding and disposition, Family Court, New York County (Susan K. Knipps, J.), entered on or about October 27, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, upon a finding of permanent neglect by the respondent mother, terminated her parental rights to the subject children and committed custody and guardianship of the children to petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Clear and convincing evidence supported the Family Court's finding that respondent mother, despite the petitioner agency's diligent efforts in referring her for mental health counseling, parenting skills programs, drug treatment programs and random drug screens, domestic violence programs, and anger management, failed to cooperate and thus, permanently neglected the children by failing to plan for their return. The mother continually refused to engage in services, and maintained that she would not comply with referred services absent court order (see e.g. Matter of Darryl Clayton T. [Adele L.], 95 A.D.3d 562, 562–563, 944 N.Y.S.2d 519 [1st Dept.2012] ; Matter of Marah B. [Lee D.], 95 A.D.3d 604, 605, 944 N.Y.S.2d 109 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 810, 2012 WL 3854504 [2012] ; Matter of Tanisha Shabazz A. [Latisha G.], 91 A.D.3d 482, 483, 935 N.Y.S.2d 887 [1st Dept.2012] ).
The finding that termination of respondent's parental rights was in the subject children's best interests was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 143–144, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824 [1984] ; Matter of Anthony P. [Shanae P.], 84 A.D.3d 510, 511, 922 N.Y.S.2d 373 [1st Dept.2011] ; Matter of Racquel Olivia M., 37 A.D.3d 279, 280, 830 N.Y.S.2d 96 [1st Dept.2007], lv. denied 8 N.Y.3d 812, 836 N.Y.S.2d 551, 868 N.E.2d 235 [2007] ).
Moreover, in light of the mother's failure to address the circumstances that resulted in the children's placement in foster care, termination of her parental rights rather than a suspended judgment is warranted (see Matter of Charles Jahmel M. [Charles E.M.], 124 A.D.3d 496, 497, 2 N.Y.S.3d 98 [1st Dept.2015], lv. denied 25 N.Y.3d 905, 2015 WL 2105786 [2015] ).
TOM, J.P., ACOSTA, ANDRIAS, MOSKOWITZ, KAHN, JJ., concur.