Kecia N., Respondent-Appellant. v. << (2005)

Family Court properly adjudicated respondent's child to be permanently neglected and terminated respondent's parental rights with respect to the child.   Petitioner met its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the relationship between respondent and the child by providing “services and other assistance aimed at ameliorating or resolving the problems preventing [the child's] return to respondent's care” (Matter of Kayte M., 201 A.D.2d 835, 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 Social Services Law § 384-b [7][a], [f][3];  Matter of Matthew C., 216 A.D.2d 637, 637-638, 627 N.Y.S.2d 822).   Petitioner “is not charged with a guarantee that [respondent] succeed in overcoming ․ her predicaments” (Matter of Sheila G., 61 N.Y.2d 368, 385, 474 N.Y.S.2d 421, 462 N.E.2d 1139;  see Matter of Christopher Jamar V., 12 A.D.3d 314, 785 N.Y.S.2d 80), and respondent's failure to complete any of the classes or other programs and services provided by petitioner does not invalidate petitioner's diligent efforts (see 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).   Finally, the record of the dispositional hearing supports the court's determination that a suspended judgment is not in the child's best interests (see Matter of Rutherford Roderick T., 4 A.D.3d 213, 214, 772 N.Y.S.2d 49;  Matter of Ada M.R., 306 A.D.2d 920, 920-921, 760 N.Y.S.2d 802, lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 509, 766 N.Y.S.2d 162, 798 N.E.2d 346).

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

MEMORANDUM: