Matter of Jada Serenity H.
2009 NY Slip Op 01721 [60 AD3d 469]
March 10, 2009
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, May 6, 2009


In the Matter of Jada Serenity H., a Child Alleged to bePermanently Neglected. Clifton H., Appellant; McMahon Services for Children/Good ShepherdServices, Respondent.

[*1]Joseph T. Gatti, New York, for respondent.

Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (John A. Newbery of counsel), LawGuardian.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Hoffman, J.), entered on orabout February 25, 2008, which terminated respondent father's parental rights to his daughterafter a fact-finding determination that he had permanently neglected the child, and transferredcustody and care to the New York City Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner for thepurpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Unlike a fact-finding hearing, where the issue of permanent neglect is resolved, adispositional hearing is concerned only with the best interests of the child (Family Ct Act§ 631). There is no presumption that those interests will best be served by return of thechild to her parent (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147-148 [1984]).

Respondent, who did not challenge the court's finding of permanent neglect, seeks asuspended judgment based on his progress in remaining drug free for approximately one yearand his intention to terminate his relationship with the child's mother, which in the past was animpediment to his obtaining custody because of the mother's drug abuse.

The child has been in the same kinship foster home for almost six years, since she was sixmonths old. The court found that her foster mother provided a loving and nurturing home andhad met all of the child's physical, emotional, medical and educational needs for almost herentire life, and that the child lived with her half sister, who was adopted by the foster mother.The foster mother has expressed a desire to adopt this child.

Despite respondent's progress in rehabilitating himself, the child should not be deniedpermanence through adoption in order to provide him with additional time to demonstrate that hecan be a fit parent. Unfortunately, his past efforts were not successful and he relapsed into drugabuse.

Termination of parental rights is warranted where the child has lived most of her life with afoster parent with whom she maintains a positive relationship, and who wants to adopt her, [*2]even where the parent has made commendable but belated effortsto remain drug free (see Matter ofRoger Guerrero B., 56 AD3d 262 [2008]; Matter of Saraphina Ameila S., 50 AD3d 378, 379 [2008]).The court correctly determined that it was in the child's best interests to terminaterespondent's parental rights and enable her to be adopted by her foster mother.Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Nardelli, DeGrasse and Freedman, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.