| Matter of Jordan F. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 03723 [62 AD3d 698] |
| May 5, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Jordan F. Suffolk County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Bradley F., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Bradley F., Jr.Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Bradley F., Appellant. (ProceedingNo. 2.) |
—[*1] Christine Malafi, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Gary Rosenthal of counsel), forrespondent. Domenik Veraldi, Jr., Islandia, N.Y., attorney for the children.
In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate thefather's parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the father appeals from an order offact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), dated May 9,2008, which, after a fact-finding hearing and a dispositional hearing, terminated his parentalrights, transferred custody and guardianship of the child Bradley F., Jr., to the petitioner, andtransferred custody and guardianship of the child Jordan F. to the paternal grandfather, for thepurpose of adoption.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the evidence presented at the fact-finding hearingestablished, [*2]by the requisite clear and convincing standard ofproof, that he permanently neglected his children by continuing to abuse drugs following thechildren's removal from his custody and by failing to complete the court mandated drugtreatment and psychotherapy programs (see Social Services Law § 384-b; see Matter of Egypt K., 59 AD3d623 [2009]; Matter of ChristopherA.R., 57 AD3d 789, 790 [2008]; Matter of Laura F., 48 AD3d 812 [2008]; Matter of Sarah JeanR., 290 AD2d 511, 512 [2002]). Notwithstanding the diligent efforts of the Suffolk CountyDepartment of Social Services to help reunite the family, the father refused to cooperate withrehabilitation programs, admitted to continued drug use, and was incarcerated on drug-relatedcharges. By his actions, the father failed to plan for his children's return (see Matter of Egypt K., 59 AD3d623 [2009]; Matter of Christopher A. R., 57 AD3d at 790; Matter of Laura F., 48 AD3d 812[2008]; Matter of Sarah Jean R., 290 AD2d at 512). The best interests of the childrenwere served by terminating the father's parental rights and freeing the children for adoption (see Matter of Egypt K., 59 AD3d623 [2009]; Matter of David O.C.,57 AD3d 775, 776 [2008]; Matter of Jamaorqui R.B., 56 AD3d 465, 466 [2008]).
The father's remaining contention is without merit. Miller, J.P., Angiolillo, Eng and Austin,JJ., concur.