Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: DADE WYNN F., etc., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Dametri F., Respondent–Appellant, St. Christopher–Ottilie, Petitioner–Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Richard Ross, J.), entered on or about September 5, 2000, which, upon a fact-finding determination of permanent neglect pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b, terminated respondent's parental rights to the subject child and transferred custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner St. Christopher–Ottilie and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Clear and convincing evidence, including the testimony of petitioner's supervising caseworker, drug test reports, and the termination summary of respondent's therapist, supports Family Court's finding that appellant, by failing to complete a drug treatment program within the statutorily relevant time frame, failed to plan for, and thus permanently neglected, her son (see, Social Services Law § 384–b(7); Matter of Natajha Starr M., 204 A.D.2d 232, 612 N.Y.S.2d 413, lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 806, 621 N.Y.S.2d 515, 645 N.E.2d 1215). Although petitioner agency diligently endeavored to help respondent address the substance abuse problems preventing the return of her child, and, in this connection, referred her for psychotherapy and arranged for her to attend a drug rehabilitation program, respondent, despite petitioner's urging, failed to avail herself meaningfully of the offered therapeutic services (see, id.; Matter of Michael M., 172 A.D.2d 152, 567 N.Y.S.2d 693). No basis exists to disturb Family Court's findings crediting the caseworker's testimony over that of petitioner.
The evidence presented at the dispositional hearing sufficed to support Family Court's determination that it was in the subject child's best interests to be freed for adoption.
We have reviewed respondent's remaining contention and find it to be unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 05, 2002
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)