IN RE: JOHN H.M. (Anonymous). (2008)

In a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from stated portions of a fact-finding order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Zimmerman, J.), dated January 8, 2007, which, after a hearing, found, inter alia, that she neglected her son John H.M.

ORDERED that the fact-finding order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The fact-finding order was supported by evidence which established that the subject child's home was maintained in an unsanitary and unsafe condition (see Matter of Nathifa B., 294 A.D.2d 432, 742 N.Y.S.2d 646;  Matter of Kathleen GG. v. Kenneth II., 254 A.D.2d 538, 678 N.Y.S.2d 689;  Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v. Anne F., 225 A.D.2d 620, 639 N.Y.S.2d 449;  Matter of Lillian R., 196 A.D.2d 503, 600 N.Y.S.2d 756).   The evidence also established that the child's physical, emotional, and mental health was impaired or in imminent danger of being impaired due to the chaotic and violent conditions in the home, the mother's failure to follow up with therapeutic recommendations for the child's diagnosed emotional problems and special needs, and her failure to administer prescribed medication or to consult a practitioner regarding alternatives (see Family Ct. Act § 1012 [f] [i][A], [B], [h];  Matter of LeVonn G., 20 A.D.3d 530, 800 N.Y.S.2d 428;  Matter of Junaro C., 145 A.D.2d 558, 559, 536 N.Y.S.2d 109;  Matter of William AA., 24 A.D.3d 1125, 1126-1127, 807 N.Y.S.2d 181).   In particular, the child's treating psychologist stated that the child exhibited dangerous behavior and opined that he was in danger of harming himself or others without the recommended treatment.   Accordingly, the petitioner proved by a preponderance of evidence that the child was neglected (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[b][i];  Matter of Tajani B., 49 A.D.3d 874, 854 N.Y.S.2d 520).

Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly concluded that the amendment to the petition did not result in either surprise or prejudice to her (see Family Ct. Act § 1051[b];  Matter of Brice L., 29 A.D.3d 910, 911, 815 N.Y.S.2d 273;  Matter of Nikole B., 263 A.D.2d 622, 692 N.Y.S.2d 807;  Matter of Michelle S., 195 A.D.2d 721, 722, 600 N.Y.S.2d 303).