Opinion
2011-10-25
In re SUKWA SINCERE G., A Dependent Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc.,Shamiqua Latisha S., Respondent–Appellant,Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau, et al., Petitioners–Respondents.
Daniel R. Katz, New York, for appellant.Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Frederick J. Magovern of counsel), for respondents.Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Judith Waksberg of counsel), and Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, New York (David A. Lewis of counsel), attorneys for the child.
Daniel R. Katz, New York, for appellant.Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Frederick J. Magovern of counsel), for respondents.Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Judith Waksberg of counsel), and Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, New York (David A. Lewis of counsel), attorneys for the child.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about May 17, 2010, which, inter alia, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother's parental rights to the subject child, and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see Social Services Law § 384–b[7][a] ). The record shows that the agency acted diligently by issuing several referrals for the mother to attend programs mandated by her service plan, and caseworkers repeatedly reminded the mother of her need to complete the programs in order to regain custody. Despite these diligent efforts, in the four years since the child's removal, the mother failed to complete her service plan in that she did not complete mental health treatment and never enrolled in a drug treatment program ( see Matter of Aniya Evelyn R. [Yolanda R.], 77 A.D.3d 593, 909 N.Y.S.2d 455 [2010]; Matter of Lady Justice I., 50 A.D.3d 425, 856 N.Y.S.2d 64 [2008] ).
A preponderance of the evidence establishes that the best interests of the child were served by the termination of the mother's parental rights ( Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147–148, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824 [1984] ). The evidence demonstrated that the child had been provided a loving and stable home environment by his paternal grandmother, who wished to adopt him. Furthermore, contrary to the mother's contention, a suspended
judgment was not warranted under the circumstances ( see Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 311, 590 N.Y.S.2d 60, 604 N.E.2d 122 [1992] ).