| Matter of Dileina M.F. (Rosa F.) |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 07637 [88 AD3d 998] |
| October 25, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Dileina M.F. MercyFirst, Respondent; Rosa F.Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Appeal No. 1.) In the Matter of Steven N.M.F. MercyFirstRespondent; Rosa F., Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Appeal No. 2.) |
—[*1] Warren & Warren, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Ira L. Eras of counsel), for petitioner-respondent. Steven C. Bernstein, Brooklyn, N.Y., Attorney for the Children.
In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminateparental rights on the grounds of mental illness and permanent neglect, the mother appeals fromtwo orders of disposition (one as to each child) of the Family Court, Kings County (Ambrosio,J.), both dated September 10, 2010, which, upon two fact-finding orders of the same court, bothdated June 1, 2010 (Ruiz, J.), made after a hearing, finding that she is presently and for theforeseeable future unable, by reason of mental illness, to provide proper and adequate care for thesubject children, and determining that she permanently neglected them, terminated her parentalrights and transferred custody and guardianship of the subject children to MercyFirst and theCommissioner of the Administration for Children's Services of the City of New York for thepurpose of adoption.
Ordered that the orders of disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly found that she permanentlyneglected the subject children. The petitioner agency established by clear and convincingevidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship(see Social Services Law § 384-b [7]; Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d136, 142-143 [1984]). These efforts included facilitating visitation, referring the mother forindividual and family therapy, providing her with financial assistance to buy food and furnitureand pay her rent arrears, and repeatedly advising her of the need to comply with the service planby attending therapy, taking her prescribed medication, keeping her rent current, and obtainingemployment (see Matter of Beyonce H.[Baranaca H.], 85 AD3d 1168, 1169 [2011]; Matter of Teshana Tracey T. [Janet T.], 71 AD3d 1032, [*2]1033 [2010]; Matter of Shamel H., 61 AD3d 685 [2009]; Matter of Danielle Joy K., 60 AD3d948, 949 [2009]; Matter ofKayshawn Raheim E., 56 AD3d 471, 472 [2008]; Matter of "Female" C., 55 AD3d 603, 604 [2008]). Despite theseefforts, the mother failed to plan for the children's future by failing to attend visitation andtherapy regularly, recognize and address the problems that led to the children's placement infoster care, take her medication consistently, or obtain steady employment and stable housing(see Matter of Beyonce H. [Baranaca H.], 85 AD3d at 1169; Matter ofZechariah J. [Valrick J.], 84 AD3d 1087, 1088 [2011]; Matter of "Female" C., 55AD3d at 604).
Further, the petitioner also established by clear and convincing evidence that the mother ispresently and for the foreseeable future unable, by reason of mental illness, to provide proper andadequate care for the children (see Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [c]). A licensedpsychologist who interviewed the mother and reviewed her medical records testified that shesuffered from a mood disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a personality disorder. Thepsychologist also testified that the mother's insight into her mental illness was poor, and that herprognosis for remedying her mental illness to the point where she would be able to parent a childwas also poor. The psychologist additionally opined that the children would be at risk of neglectif placed in the mother's care based on her long-standing pattern of functioning and behavior.This evidence supported the Family Court's determination (see Matter of Dominique Larissa Blue M. [Yasmin M.], 84 AD3d962, 963 [2011]; Matter ofAlexander James R., 48 AD3d 820, 821 [2008]; Matter of Tamaine William B., 38 AD3d 767, 768 [2007]; Matter of Tyler Shannara S., 38 AD3d560, 561 [2007]).
Accordingly, the Family Court properly terminated the mother's parental rights on thegrounds of both mental illness and permanent neglect. Mastro, J.P., Eng, Belen and Hall, JJ.,concur.