Opinion
December 27, 1994
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.).
The findings of permanent neglect were supported by clear and convincing evidence that, despite the agency's diligent effort, respondents did not plan for the return of their children since they failed to acknowledge and address the problems which had resulted in the placement of the children in foster care after two findings of excessive corporal punishment (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [a]; Matter of Sheila G., 61 N.Y.2d 368). Parents are required to "formulate a feasible plan * * * [which] presupposes, at a minimum, that the parents take steps to correct the conditions that led to the removal of the child from their home" (Matter of Leon RR, 48 N.Y.2d 117, 125). The agency's referral to a variety of therapy and counseling programs and additional supportive services constituted the reasonable statutory efforts required (see, Matter of O. Children, 128 A.D.2d 460). A finding of neglect may be rendered even where a parent has attended therapy and participated in offered resources without ameliorating the problem preventing discharge (see, Matter of Sonia H., 177 A.D.2d 575, 576-577).
The court properly terminated respondents' parental rights based upon the best interests of the children, as there is no presumption that the children's well-being will best be served by return to their natural parents (Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147-148). Although separation of siblings is not desirable, it is sometimes necessary to serve their best interests (see, Matter of Malik M., 40 N.Y.2d 840).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.