IN RE: JENNY A. (2008)

 On appeal from an order dismissing her petition seeking custody and visitation of her two children following her judicial surrender of her children to respondent (see Social Services Law § 383-c[3] ), petitioner mother contends that she was coerced by respondent to execute the surrender instrument.   We reject that contention.   According to the mother, she had been informed by respondent that it would seek termination of her parental rights if she did not agree to the surrender.   A surrender instrument is voidable on the ground of coercion or duress “when a party establishes that he [or she] was forced to agree to it by means of a wrongful threat which precluded the exercise of his [or her] free will” (Matter of Podmore v. Our Lady of Victory Infant Home, 82 A.D.2d 48, 50, 442 N.Y.S.2d 334).  “[I]nforming a parent of an accurate, albeit unpleasant, event is not coercion” (Matter of Baby Boy O., 289 A.D.2d 631, 633, 733 N.Y.S.2d 768, lv. dismissed 97 N.Y.2d 725, 740 N.Y.S.2d 697, 767 N.E.2d 154).   To the contrary, that information, i.e., respondent's intention to seek termination of the mother's parental rights, was necessary to enable the mother to make an informed decision (see id.).

We reject the further contention of the mother that the surrender instrument was void because she believed that she would still have visitation rights with her children.   The record establishes that the only condition of the surrender instrument was that the children would be adopted by their foster parents (see Social Services Law § 383-c[2][a] ) and, contrary to the contention of the mother, there was no agreement therein providing for communication or contact between the mother and the children (see § 383-c[2][b] ).

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

MEMORANDUM: