IN RE: SORAYA S. (2018)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia, terminated her parental rights with respect to the subject child on the ground of permanent neglect and transferred guardianship and custody of the child to petitioner.  Contrary to the mother's contention, petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the relationship between the mother and the child (see Social Services Law § 384–b [7][a] ).  The evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing established that petitioner, inter alia, provided mental health care referrals, parenting classes, and transportation or bus tickets and/or mileage reimbursement to counseling and the child's medical appointments, and scheduled and coordinated visitation (see Matter of Joshua T.N. [Tommie M.], 140 A.D.3d 1763, 1763, 32 N.Y.S.3d 793 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 904, 2016 WL 6112163 [2016];  Matter of Jerikkoh W. [Rebecca W.], 134 A.D.3d 1550, 1550–1551, 23 N.Y.S.3d 784 [4th Dept. 2015], lv denied 27 N.Y.3d 903, 2016 WL 1313366 [2016] ).

In addition, we conclude that, despite those diligent efforts, the mother failed to plan for the future of the child (see Matter of Burke H. [Richard H.], 134 A.D.3d 1499, 1500–1501, 23 N.Y.S.3d 776 [4th Dept. 2015] ).  “It is well settled that, to plan substantially for a child's future, ‘the parent must take meaningful steps to correct the conditions that led to the child's removal’ ” (Jerikkoh W., 134 A.D.3d at 1551, 23 N.Y.S.3d 784).  Here, Family Court required the mother to complete various programs and to attend regularly appointments for mental health treatment, but she failed to do either.  She voluntarily ceased attending her court-ordered attachment-based therapy and was not engaged or cooperative when she did attend.  The mother also missed more than two-thirds of the child's medical appointments and failed to take advantage of numerous visitation opportunities.  To the extent that the mother participated in any of the recommended or ordered programs or services, she “did not successfully address or gain insight into the problems that led to the removal of the child and continued to prevent the child's safe return” (Matter of Giovanni K., 62 A.D.3d 1242, 1243, 878 N.Y.S.2d 846 [4th Dept. 2009], lv denied 12 N.Y.3d 715, 2009 WL 1851454 [2009];  see Matter of Rachael N. [Christine N.], 70 A.D.3d 1374, 1374, 894 N.Y.S.2d 265 [4th Dept. 2010], lv denied 15 N.Y.3d 708, 2010 WL 3583146 [2010] ), asserting that she did not “need to be taught how to be a parent.”

Finally, the record supports the court's decision to terminate the mother's parental rights rather than to grant a suspended judgment (see Matter of Cyle F. [Alexander F.], 155 A.D.3d 1626, 1627–1628, 64 N.Y.S.3d 842 [4th Dept. 2017];  Matter of Kendalle K. [Corin K.], 144 A.D.3d 1670, 1672, 41 N.Y.S.3d 832 [4th Dept. 2016] ).

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

Memorandum: