Opinion
9322 9322A
05-16-2019
IN RE NAHZZEAR Y.G., and Another, Dependant Children Under the Age of Eighteen, etc., Tanisha N., Respondent–Appellant, v. Abbott House, Petitioner–Respondent.
Larry S. Bachner, New York, for appellant. John R. Eyerman, New York, for respondent. George E. Reed, Jr., White Plains, attorney for the children.
Larry S. Bachner, New York, for appellant.
John R. Eyerman, New York, for respondent.
George E. Reed, Jr., White Plains, attorney for the children.
Gische, J.P., Kahn, Gesmer, Singh, Moulton, JJ.
Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Ruben Andres Martino, J.), entered on or about January 30, 2018, which, inter alia, upon findings of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother's parental rights to the subject children, and committed custody and guardianship of the children to petitioner agency and the Administration for Children's Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The agency demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that it made the requisite diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship by discussing the mother's service plan with her, monitoring her progress with mental health treatment, and scheduling twice weekly visitation with the children (see Matter of Felicia Malon Rogue J. [Lena J.], 146 A.D.3d 725, 46 N.Y.S.3d 66 [1st Dept. 2017] ; Matter of Davione Rashaun H., 55 A.D.3d 453, 865 N.Y.S.2d 596 [1st Dept. 2008] ). Despite these diligent efforts, and the mother making some progress, overall, the mother failed to plan for the children as she continued to speak aggressively, curse repeatedly, and threaten violence towards others over the entirety of the case (see Matter of Brandon H. [Maythe H.], 105 A.D.3d 409, 963 N.Y.S.2d 19 [1st Dept. 2013] ), and displayed little insight into her therapy and the fact that these actions may prove harmful to her children (see Matter of L. Children [Wileen J., 168 A.D.3d 455, 456, 92 N.Y.S.3d 47 [1st Dept. 2019] ). She also refused to sign HIPAA consent forms to allow the agency to monitor her mental health progress, and failed to secure suitable housing (see Matter of Elizabeth E.R.T. [Alicia T.], 168 A.D.3d 448, 449, 91 N.Y.S.3d 404 [1st Dept. 2019] ; Matter of Jessica U. [Stephanie U.], 152 A.D.3d 1001, 1005, 59 N.Y.S.3d 195 [3d Dept. 2017] ). Furthermore, the mother missed or cancelled approximately a third of her visits with her children over a two-year period ( Matter of Lenny R., 22 A.D.3d 240, 802 N.Y.S.2d 37 [1st Dept. 2005], lv denied 6 N.Y.3d 708, 812 N.Y.S.2d 443, 845 N.E.2d 1274 [2006] ).A preponderance of the evidence supports the determination that termination of the mother's parental rights to free the children for adoption by their foster parent, with whom they lived with for almost their entire lives and thrived under, was in their best interest (see Matter of Ariana S.S. [Antoinette S.], 148 A.D.3d 581, 50 N.Y.S.3d 334 [1st Dept. 2017] ). A suspended judgment was not warranted under the circumstances presented.