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: CHARLES EMANUEL M. (Anonymous). St. Vincent's Services, Inc., Respondent; Joy M. (Anonymous), Appellant (Proceeding No. 1). In the Matter of David Paul M. (Anonymous). St. Vincent's Services, Inc., Respondent; Joy M. (Anonymous), Appellant (Proceeding No. 2). In the Matter of Jessica Paris M. (Anonymous). St. Vincent's Services, Inc., Respondent; Joy M. (Anonymous), Appellant (Proceeding No. 3).
In three related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384 b to terminate the mother's parental rights, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of three orders of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Porzio, J.) (one as to each child), all dated May 28, 1998, as, after a joint fact-finding hearing, granted the respective petitions and committed the guardianship and custody of the children to the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York and to the petitioner St. Vincent's Services, Inc., for the purpose of consenting to their adoption.
ORDERED that the orders of disposition are affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
We agree with the Family Court that there was clear and convincing evidence that the mother is presently and for the foreseeable future unable, by reason of mental illness, to provide proper and adequate care of the subject children (see Social Services Law § 384-b[4][c]; Matter of Harlem Dowling-Westside Ctr. for Children and Family Servs., [Ebony Shaquiera C.] v. Marion L. C., 264 A.D.2d 845, 695 N.Y.S.2d 590; Matter of Juliana V. [Libia E.], 249 A.D.2d 314, 315, 671 N.Y.S.2d 105; Matter of Virginia Denise R. [Geraldine R.], 249 A.D.2d 400, 671 N.Y.S.2d 133; Matter of Edward R., 123 A.D.2d 866, 867, 507 N.Y.S.2d 647; cf. Matter of Hime Y., 52 N.Y.2d 242, 248, 437 N.Y.S.2d 286, 418 N.E.2d 1305).
Contrary to the mother's contention, the psychologist's testimony regarding the prospects for the foreseeable future was unequivocal. While he testified that it was difficult to give a prognosis regarding the foreseeable future because the mother's condition was changeable and her ability to care for the children would depend on the extent to which she was symptomatic, he also unequivocally testified that the mother would not be able to provide proper and adequate parenting and that the children would always be at a certain level of risk under her care (compare Matter of Hime Y, supra, at 249, 437 N.Y.S.2d 286, 418 N.E.2d 1305).
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: April 01, 2002
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)