Opinion
October 22, 1992
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.).
Having arranged regular visits between the incarcerated respondent and his child, repeatedly reminding respondent of the need to find a resource for the care of his child, and by attempting, with inadequate assistance from respondent, to identify such a suitable resource, the petitioning agency clearly fulfilled its obligation to use "diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship" between respondent and his son (Social Services Law § 384-b [a]; see, Matter of Gregory B., 74 N.Y.2d 77).
While we would favor a post-adoption relationship between the child and respondent in the instant circumstances, the Court of Appeals has stated that this alternative is not presently authorized. (Supra.)
Concur — Carro, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.