Ana C. v. Catholic Guardian Soc'y (In re Dina Loraine P.)

• Decision Date: 27 June 2013
• Citation: 969 N.Y.S.2d 15,107 A.D.3d 634,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04898
• Parties: In re DINA LORAINE P., and Another, Dependent Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Ana C., Respondent–Appellant, v. Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau, Petitioner–Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

107 A.D.3d 634

969 N.Y.S.2d 15

2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 04898

In re DINA LORAINE P., and Another, Dependent Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc.,Ana C., Respondent–Appellant,

v.Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau, Petitioner–Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

June 27, 2013.

Andrew J. Baer, New York, for appellant.

Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Joanna M. Roberson of counsel), for respondent.

Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Diane Pazar of counsel), attorney for the children.

TOM, J.P., MAZZARELLI, MOSKOWITZ, GISCHE, JJ.

Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Anne–Marie Jolly, J.), entered on or about April 16, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, following a fact-finding hearing, found that respondent mother permanently neglected the two subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of permanent neglect is supported by clear and convincing evidence that petitioner agency made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by, among other things, scheduling visitation with the children, providing respondent with referrals for services, and assisting her with her immigration status ( seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7][a], [f]; Matter of Aliyah Julia N. [Cecelia Lee N.], 81 A.D.3d 519, 519, 917 N.Y.S.2d 166 [1st Dept. 2011] ). Respondent failed, during the statutorily relevant period, to meaningfully avail herself of the services deemed essential to prepare her to assume custodial parenting responsibilities by failing to complete mental health services and obtain suitable housing for the children ( see Matter of Racquel Olivia M., 37 A.D.3d 279, 280, 830 N.Y.S.2d 96 [1st Dept. 2007], lv. denied8 N.Y.3d 812, 836 N.Y.S.2d 551, 868 N.E.2d 235 [2007] ). Although respondent completed an anger management program and a parenting skills class, the testimony demonstrates that she failed to gain insight into her inability to control her anger and thus failed to adequately plan for the children's future ( see Matter of Janell J. [Shanequa J.], 88 A.D.3d 512, 930 N.Y.S.2d 196 [1st Dept. 2011] ).

We have considered respondent's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.