| Matter of Mykle Andrew P. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 07182 [55 AD3d 305] |
| October 2, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of Mykle Andrew P., a Child Alleged to bePermanently Neglected. Antonio P., Appellant; Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau,Respondent. |
—[*1] Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Joanna M. Roberson of counsel), for respondent. Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Marcia Egger of counsel), LawGuardian.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara P. Schechter, J.), entered on orabout August 17, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of permanent neglect,terminated respondent's parental rights to the subject child and committed the child to petitioneragency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimouslyaffirmed, without costs.
Clear and convincing evidence established that the agency satisfied its statutory obligation tomake diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by providing referralsto parenting skills and anger management programs, scheduling visitation, helping respondentfind adequate housing and suitable employment, and encouraging him to attend psychologicalprograms, and that respondent failed to plan for the child's future by failing to commit toindividual counseling during the relevant period, to complete an anger management program, andto obtain housing (see Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a], [c]; Matter of StarLeslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 142-143 [1984]; Matter of Elizabeth Amanda T., 52 AD3d 376 [2008]).
That the termination of respondent's parental rights is in the child's best interests wasestablished by a preponderance of the evidence, which showed, inter alia, that the child had beenin foster care for more than three years at the time of the dispositional hearing and that his fosterparents, who have been addressing his special needs, want to adopt him (see Matter of Taaliyah Simone S.D., 28AD3d 371 [2006]). Even crediting respondent's assertions that he completed an angermanagement program and obtained employment after the finding of neglect was made, suchrelatively recent efforts to comply with the agency's recommendations are insufficient to warrantan alternative disposition, such as a suspended judgment (see Matter of Charles Curbelo C., 12 AD3d 270 [2004], lvdenied 4 NY3d 706 [2005]). Concur—Lippman, P.J., Gonzalez, Nardelli, Acosta andDeGrasse, JJ.[*2]