Johnny F., Respondent–Appellant. v. << (1999)

Family Court's determination that the children were permanently neglected by respondent is supported by clear and convincing evidence.   The record establishes that petitioner made diligent efforts to strengthen the relationship between respondent and the children (see, Social Services Law § 384–b[7][a] ) by providing “services and other assistance aimed at ameliorating or resolving the problems preventing [the children's] return to respondent's care” (Matter of Kayte M., 201 A.D.2d 835, 608 N.Y.S.2d 711, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 757, 614 N.Y.S.2d 386, 637 N.E.2d 277;  see, Matter of Michelle F., 222 A.D.2d 747, 748–749, 635 N.Y.S.2d 709).   Although respondent participated in some of the services provided by petitioner, he did not successfully address his problems with drug abuse and domestic violence that led to the removal of the children from the home (see, Matter of Maldrina R., 219 A.D.2d 723, 631 N.Y.S.2d 742;  Matter of Regina M.C., 139 A.D.2d 929, 528 N.Y.S.2d 953).  “Because [he] failed to make any progress in overcoming the problems that initially endangered the children and continued to prevent their safe return, the court properly found that respondent was unable to make an adequate plan for [his] children's future” (Matter of Rebecca D., 222 A.D.2d 1092, 635 N.Y.S.2d 847).

The court properly determined that a suspended judgment would not be in the best interests of the children (see, Matter of Sonny H.B., 249 A.D.2d 940, 672 N.Y.S.2d 579).   Finally, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the request of respondent's counsel to withdraw or for a continuance.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: