Opinion
01-21-2015
In the Matter of ZACHI D.D. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Jeffrey D. (anonymous), appellant.
Susan A. DeNatale, Bayport, N.Y., for appellant. Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Mary Ann Filosa of counsel), for respondent. Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (John B. Belmonte of counsel), attorney for the child.
Susan A. DeNatale, Bayport, N.Y., for appellant.
Dennis M. Brown, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Mary Ann Filosa of counsel), for respondent.
Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (John B. Belmonte of counsel), attorney for the child.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, and SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
Appeal from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (David Freundlich, J.), dated December 23, 2013. The order, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that the father permanently neglected the subject child, terminated his parental rights, and transferred the guardianship and custody of the subject child to the Suffolk County Department of Social Services for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court's finding that the father permanently neglected the subject child was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see Social Services Law § 384–b[7][a] ). The petitioner made the requisite diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship. Those efforts included arranging for the child's visitation with the father, who was incarcerated for part of the relevant period, repeatedly reminding the father of the need to complete the court-ordered programs, and keeping the father apprised of the child's progress (see Matter of Jessica C. [Johanna B.], 117 A.D.3d 1044, 986 N.Y.S.2d 543 ; Matter of Dutchess County Dept. of Social Servs. [Tony R.], 115 A.D.3d 952, 982 N.Y.S.2d 556 ; Matter of Precious D.A. [Tasha A.], 110 A.D.3d 789, 789–790, 973 N.Y.S.2d 660 ; Matter of Joannis P. [Joseph Q.], 110 A.D.3d 1188, 1190, 974 N.Y.S.2d 139 ; Matter of Darryl A.H. [Olga Z.], 109 A.D.3d 824, 824, 971 N.Y.S.2d 134 ). Despite the petitioner's diligent efforts, the father failed to adequately plan for his child's future (see Social Services Law 384–b[7] [c] ; Matter of Angel R.F. [Nicholas F.], 114 A.D.3d 781, 782, 980 N.Y.S.2d 528 ; Matter of Darryl A.H. [Olga Z.], 109 A.D.3d 824, 971 N.Y.S.2d 134 ; Matter of Tarmara F.J. [Jaineen J.], 108 A.D.3d 543, 543–544, 969 N.Y.S.2d 119 ; Matter of Kira J. [Lakisha J.], 108 A.D.3d 541, 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 father's parental rights (see Matter of Walter D.H. [Zaire L.], 91 A.D.3d 950, 938 N.Y.S.2d 567 ; Matter of Anthony R. [Juliann A.], 90 A.D.3d 1055, 937 N.Y.S.2d 72 ; Matter of Jamel Raheem B. [Vernice B.], 89 A.D.3d 933, 933 N.Y.S.2d 307 ; Matter of Tyria W., 41 A.D.3d 859, 838 N.Y.S.2d 184 ). Termination of parental rights will free the child for adoption, providing him with the opportunity to have a permanent family (see Matter of Anthony R. [Juliann A.], 90 A.D.3d at 1056–1057, 937 N.Y.S.2d 72 ). The entry of a suspended judgment was not appropriate here in light of the father's lack of insight into his problems and his failure to acknowledge and address the issues which led to the child's removal from his custody in the first instance (see Matter of Jamel Raheem B. [Vernice B.], 89 A.D.3d at 936, 933 N.Y.S.2d 307 ; see also Matter of Walter D.H. [Zaire L.], 91 A.D.3d 950, 938 N.Y.S.2d 567 ; Matter of Anthony R. [Juliann A.], 90 A.D.3d 1055, 937 N.Y.S.2d 72 ; Matter of Tyria W., 41 A.D.3d 859, 838 N.Y.S.2d 184 ).