Opinion
July 3, 1989
Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (Gage, J.).
Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petition in this child abuse case alleged that the appellant father sexually abused his infant son during the course of unsupervised weekend visits at his home during the summer of 1986.
A review of the record establishes that the petitioner presented a prima facie showing that the father had sexually abused the child, including the child's out-of-court statements to a social worker and to a "validator" respecting the nature of the sexual acts performed, which statements were sufficiently corroborated by medical evidence (see, Matter of Nicole V., 71 N.Y.2d 112; Matter of Kimberly K., 123 A.D.2d 865).
Once a prima facie case has been established by the petitioner, the burden shifts to the alleged abuser to offer a satisfactory explanation to rebut the evidence (see, Matter of Jacinta J., 140 A.D.2d 990, 991). Since the father failed to come forward with satisfactory evidence to rebut the petitioner's case, the petitioner satisfied the requirement of Family Court Act § 1046 (b) that abuse be established by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Jacinta J., supra, at 990).
We see no reason to disturb the Family Court's dispositional order which prohibited the father from having unsupervised contact with the son for a period of five years or until the issuance of a further court order (see, Matter of Erin G., 139 A.D.2d 737, 738). We further find that the Family Court's order directing monitored supervised biweekly visitation under the auspices of a mental health professional was appropriate.
We have reviewed the father's further contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.