IN RE: HARLEM DOWLING-WESTSIDE CENTER FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES o/b/o Kimberly Jean R. (Anonymous) (1997)

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the parental rights of the mother and the father of the subject child, the Law Guardian and the petitioner Harlem Dowling-Westside Center for Children and Family Services separately appeal from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Lauria, J.), dated June 25, 1996, which, after a fact-finding hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition to terminate parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for a dispositional hearing in accordance herewith, before another Judge.

'In a proceeding to terminate parental rights based on permanent neglect, the agency must establish as a threshold matter that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship (see, Matter of Sheila G., 61 N.Y.2d 368, 371, 474 N.Y.S.2d 421, 462 N.E.2d 1139).   The diligent efforts must include reasonable attempts at providing counseling, scheduling regular visitation with the child, providing services to the parents to overcome problems which prevent the discharge of the child into their care, and informing the parents of their child's progress (see, Social Services Law § 384-b[7][f];  Matter of Jamie M., 63 N.Y.2d 388, 394-395, 482 N.Y.S.2d 461, 472 N.E.2d 311).   However, an agency which diligently attempts to reunite the parents and child but is confronted by uncooperative parents is deemed to have fulfilled its obligation (see, Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 144, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824).

'Here, the record demonstrates that the petitioner Harlem Dowling-Westside Center for Children and Family Services (hereinafter the agency) met its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that it exercised diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship (see, Social Services Law § 384-b[7][a], [f] ).  Among other things, the agency established reunification goals for both the mother and father which included plans to address their respective needs, it conducted regular plan reviews, it repeatedly referred the parents to services designed to address their respective needs, it provided the parents with counseling, and established a regular visitation schedule with the child.   The agency's efforts did not succeed, however, because the father, who was found to have sexually abused the child, failed to complete a sex offender program and acknowledge his guilt, and the mother, who had a substance abuse problem, failed to complete a drug treatment program or otherwise demonstrate that she was drug-free.

As noted by the Law Guardian, the agency exerted broad-based, creative, and unremitting efforts for many years to address a host of problems with respect to both parents, neither of whom took more than cursory steps toward confronting his or her problems and creating a safe and loving environment for the daughter.   Remarkably, the agency persisted in its efforts for almost two years after announcing a goal change to adoption, thereby affording the parents abundant time to turn their lives around despite their many past mistakes (see, Social Services Law § 384-b[7][c];  Matter of Reggie B., 223 A.D.2d 471, 636 N.Y.S.2d 790;  Matter of Dutchess County Dept. of Social Servs. v. Kenneth D., 213 A.D.2d 714, 624 N.Y.S.2d 455;  Matter of Victor James L., 208 A.D.2d 403, 618 N.Y.S.2d 213;  Matter of Travis Lee G., 169 A.D.2d 769, 565 N.Y.S.2d 136).

Accordingly, we find that the child has been permanently neglected.   Upon such a finding, the matter must be remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for a dispositional hearing, to be conducted as expeditiously as possible, to determine what placement is in the best interest of the child (see, Family Ct. Act §§ 623, 625[a];  § 631).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.