| Matter of Dominique Larissa Blue M. (Yasmin M.) |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 04055 [84 AD3d 962] |
| May 10, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Dominique Larissa Blue M., Also Known asDominique La'Rissa B. Nassau County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Yasmin M.,Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Casey M., Also Known as Casey Jeremiah M.-D.,Jr. Nassau County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Yasmin M., Appellant.(Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Cason M., Also Known as Cason Joshua M.-D. NassauCounty Department of Social Services, Respondent; Yasmin M., Appellant. (Proceeding No.3.) |
—[*1] John Ciampoli, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Joseph A. Kellermann of counsel), forrespondent. Theresa Kloeckener, Valley Stream, N.Y., Attorney for the Children.
In three related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate themother's parental rights on the ground of mental illness, the mother appeals, as limited by herbrief, from three orders of fact-finding and disposition (one as to each child) of the Family Court,Nassau County (Dane, J.), two dated February 18, 2010, and one dated February 24, 2010, which,after a fact-finding hearing, found that she is presently and for the foreseeable future unable, byreason of mental illness, to provide proper and adequate care for the subject children, terminatedher parental rights, and transferred guardianship and custody of the subject children to thepetitioner for the purpose of adoption.
Ordered that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed, without costs or [*2]disbursements.
As a threshold matter, we agree with the mother that the Family Court erred in admitting intoevidence, in its entirety, the forensic psychological evaluation prepared by the court-appointedpsychologist who evaluated her as part of the instant proceedings insofar as it included someinadmissible hearsay. However, under the circumstances, such error was harmless (see Matterof Lindsay N., 300 AD2d 216 [2002]; Barracato v Camp Bauman Buses, 217 AD2d677, 678 [1995]; see generally Green Is. Assoc. v Lawler, Matusky & Skelly Engrs., 170AD2d 854, 857 [1991]).
Further, there was clear and convincing evidence to support the Family Court's determinationthat the mother is presently and for the foreseeable future unable, by reason of mental illness, toprovide proper and adequate care for the subject children (see Social Services Law§ 384-b [4] [c]; Matter ofTamaine William B., 38 AD3d 767 [2007]). In particular, after testing and interviewingthe mother and reviewing certain of her records, the court-appointed psychologist testified thatthe mother suffers from schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and that, in his opinion, inter alia,due to the chronic nature of the illness, serious and enduring deficits in her ability to parent, herlack of insight about her illness and ability to parent, her need for consistent mental healthintervention, and the inability of her symptoms to be managed to the point that she can properlyand adequately care for the children, the mother is presently and for the foreseeable futureunable, by reason of mental illness to provide proper and adequate care for the subject children.The foregoing evidence supported the Family Court's determination (see Matter of Sean Roni M., 35 AD3d473 [2006]; Matter of KarynKatrina D., 19 AD3d 592 [2005]; Matter of Michael W., 15 AD3d 670 [2005]; Matter of Winston Lloyd D., 7 AD3d706 [2004]; Matter of Nina D.,6 AD3d 702, 703 [2004]; Matter of Jon C., 305 AD2d 592 [2003]; Matter ofHeather Rose R., 301 AD2d 530 [2003]; Matter of Pariis L., 286 AD2d 501 [2001]).
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal andBelen, JJ., concur.