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: JORDAN F. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Bradley F. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Bradley F. (Anonymous), Jr. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, respondent; Bradley F. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2).
In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the father's parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the father appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), dated May 9, 2008, which, after a fact-finding hearing and a dispositional hearing, terminated his parental rights, transferred custody and guardianship of the child Bradley F., Jr., to the petitioner, and transferred custody and guardianship of the child Jordan F. to the paternal grandfather, for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the evidence presented at the fact-finding hearing established, by the requisite clear and convincing standard of proof, that he permanently neglected his children by continuing to abuse drugs following the children's removal from his custody and by failing to complete the court mandated drug treatment and psychotherapy programs (see Social Services Law § 384-b; see Matter of Egypt K., 59 A.D.3d 623, 873 N.Y.S.2d 707; Matter of Christopher A.R., 57 A.D.3d 789, 790, 870 N.Y.S.2d 397; Matter of Laura F., 48 A.D.3d 812, 852 N.Y.S.2d 388; Matter of Sarah Jean R., 290 A.D.2d 511, 512, 736 N.Y.S.2d 410). Notwithstanding the diligent efforts of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services to help reunite the family, the father refused to cooperate with rehabilitation programs, admitted to continued drug use, and was incarcerated on drug-related charges. By his actions, the father failed to plan for his children's return (see Matter of Egypt K., 59 A.D.3d 623, 873 N.Y.S.2d 707; Matter of Christopher A.R., 57 A.D.3d at 790, 870 N.Y.S.2d 397; Matter of Laura F., 48 A.D.3d 812, 852 N.Y.S.2d 388; Matter of Sarah Jean R., 290 A.D.2d at 512, 736 N.Y.S.2d 410). The best interests of the children were served by terminating the father's parental rights and freeing the children for adoption (see Matter of Egypt K., 59 A.D.3d 623, 873 N.Y.S.2d 707; Matter of David O.C., 57 A.D.3d 775, 776, 870 N.Y.S.2d 389; Matter of Jamaorqui R.B., 56 A.D.3d 465, 466, 867 N.Y.S.2d 488).
The father's remaining contention is without merit.
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: May 05, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)