Opinion
2012-01-24
In the Matter of HADIYYAH J.M. (Anonymous).St. Vincent's Services, Inc., respondent;Fatima D.R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1).In the Matter of Jonathan J.R. (Anonymous).St. Vincent's Services, Inc., respondent;Fatima D.R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2).In the Matter of Tiffany M.R. (Anonymous).St. Vincent's Services, Inc., respondent;Fatima D.R. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3).
Edward E. Caesar, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Magovern & Sclafani, New York, N.Y. (Frederick J. Magovern and Joanna M. Robertson of counsel), for respondent.
Edward E. Caesar, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Magovern & Sclafani, New York, N.Y. (Frederick J. Magovern and Joanna M. Robertson of counsel), for respondent. Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler, Judith Waksberg, and Laura Dillon of counsel), attorney for the children.REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, SANDRA L. SGROI, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
In three related proceedings to terminate parental rights pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from three orders of fact-finding and disposition (one as to each child) of the Family Court, Kings County (Beckoff, J.), all entered November 23, 2010, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that she permanently neglected the children, terminated her parental rights, and transferred custody and guardianship of the children to the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York and the petitioner, St. Vincent's Services, Inc., for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly found that she permanently neglected the subject children. The petitioner agency established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by meeting with the mother to review her service plan and discussing the importance of compliance, making efforts to enroll the mother in a day treatment program to address her anger management and mental health issues, and scheduling visitation between the mother and the subject children ( see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 142, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824; Matter of Fernando Alexander B. [ Simone Anita W.], 85 A.D.3d 658, 659, 925 N.Y.S.2d 823; Matter of John M. [ Raymond K.], 82 A.D.3d 1100, 919 N.Y.S.2d 346). Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the future of the children ( see Social Services Law § 384–b[7][c]; Matter of Beyonce H. [ Baranaca H.], 85 A.D.3d 1168, 1169, 927 N.Y.S.2d 121). The mother's partial compliance with the service plan was insufficient to preclude a finding of permanent neglect ( see Matter of “Female” C., 55 A.D.3d 603, 604, 866 N.Y.S.2d 220; Matter of Robert David L., 7 A.D.3d 529, 530, 776 N.Y.S.2d 316; Matter of Shane Anthony P., 307 A.D.2d 297, 762 N.Y.S.2d 503).
Furthermore, the Family Court correctly determined that it would be in the children's best interests to terminate the mother's parental rights and free the children for adoption by their respective foster parents, with whom the three children had been living continuously since 2004 ( see Matter of Daevon Lamar P., 48 A.D.3d 469, 470, 849 N.Y.S.2d 806; Matter of Tynell S., 43 A.D.3d 1171, 1173, 842 N.Y.S.2d 90).