IN RE: SETH G. and John R. (2008)

 Respondent mother appeals from an order adjudicating her three-year-old child to be an abused child and her newborn child to be derivatively neglected.   Petitioner presented the testimony of a physician establishing that the three-year-old child sustained extensive bruising on his face and shoulder as the result of pressure placed around his neck for at least 30 seconds.   Contrary to the mother's contention, petitioner established a prima facie case of child abuse with respect to the three-year-old child (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[a][ii] ), and the mother failed to rebut the presumption of parental responsibility (see Matter of Philip M., 82 N.Y.2d 238, 245-246, 604 N.Y.S.2d 40, 624 N.E.2d 168).   The record establishes that the mother had given petitioner's caseworkers varying explanations for the child's injury, and Family Court was entitled to discredit those explanations (see Matter of Alyssa C.M., 17 A.D.3d 1023, 1024, 794 N.Y.S.2d 224, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 706, 801 N.Y.S.2d 799, 835 N.E.2d 659).   The newborn child was born several days after the three-year-old child was injured, and we conclude that the court properly determined that the newborn child was derivatively neglected inasmuch as the mother's abuse of the three-year-old child was “ ‘so closely connected with the care of [the newborn] child as to indicate that the [newborn] child [was] equally at risk’ ” (Matter of A.R., 309 A.D.2d 1153, 1153, 764 N.Y.S.2d 746, quoting Matter of Marino S., 100 N.Y.2d 361, 374, 763 N.Y.S.2d 796, 795 N.E.2d 21, cert. denied 540 U.S. 1059, 124 S.Ct. 834, 157 L.Ed.2d 714).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: