Jeremy H., Matter of

• Decision Date: 11 June 1991
• Citation: 151 Misc.2d 557,573 N.Y.S.2d 373
• Parties: In the Matter of a Review of the Foster Care Status of JEREMY H. Pursuant to Section 392 of the Social Services Law.
• Court: New York Family Court

Page 373

573 N.Y.S.2d 373

151 Misc.2d 557

In the Matter of a Review of the Foster Care Status of JEREMY H. Pursuant to Section 392 of the Social Services Law.

Family Court, Monroe County.

June 11, 1991.

Joyce Parker, Rochester, for petitioner.

Paul Humphrey, Rochester, for Dept. of Social Services.

Margaret Boldt, Legal Aid Soc., Rochester, for Jeremy H.

JOAN S. KOHOUT, Judge.

This proceeding was commenced by an Order to Show Cause filed by Hillside Children's Center (HCC) pursuant to Social Services Law Sec. 392, requesting an Order reviewing and continuing the foster care placement of the child Jeremy H. with the Monroe County Dept. of Social Services (MCDSS). On May 13, 1991 the matter came on to be heard at which time counsel for Hillside Children's Center appeared, counsel for the Monroe County Dept. of Social Services, the Law Guardian for Jeremy and Jeremy's foster/prospective adoptive mother. At that time no opposition was entered by any party to the request to continue foster care.

At the hearing on May 13, 1991 it was agreed by all parties that continued foster care placement was in Jeremy's best interest given the fact that Jeremy's parents had surrendered him for adoption and he had been placed in the pre-adoptive home of Phillip and Sylvia P. The only question presented to the Court was whether the petition was timely filed pursuant to the requirements of Social Services Law Sec. 392.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The record in this case established that Jeremy, born 8/28/77, was placed in foster care with MCDSS by his mother on June 22, 1988. According to reports provided to the Court, Jeremy was placed in a specialized therapeutic foster care program run by HCC due to behavior problems and his psychiatric history. On February 7, 1990 a S.S.L. Sec. 392 Foster Care Review occurred before Family Court Judge Anthony J. Sciolino, which resulted in a consent order approving Jeremy's placement up to December 23, 1990.

On March 7, 1990 his mother executed a surrender for adoption and on September 6, 1990 a similar surrender was executed by his father. On November 1, 1990 Jeremy was discharged from the therapeutic foster care program and placed in the prospective adoptive home of Mr. and Mrs. P. No party has contested the fact that the P. home is properly described as a pre-adoptive home or that this placement is consistent with Jeremy's best interest. To the contrary, all parties agree that the foster care services currently in place should be continued as requested by HCC.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This proceeding was commenced by HCC by an Order to Show Cause. This vehicle was used because there was a question of timeliness of the action, resulting from a certain lack of clarity in Social Services Sec. 392 relative to foster care reviews for children available for adoption. More specifically, this case addresses the question of when must foster care status be reviewed after a child has been freed for adoption, placed in a prospective adoptive home and has previously been the subject of a S.S.L. Sec. 392 review where a time limited order of placement has been made.

In 1986 the New York State Legislature amended the foster care review provisions of Social Services Law Sec. 392 to include certain requirements for the review of the status of children who have been freed for adoption. Laws of 1986, Chapter 902, eff. August 5, 1986. Prior to that time no foster care review was required for children who had been surrendered by their parents or caregivers for adoption.

Social Services Law Sec. 392(3)(d) provides three alternative time frames for foster care review after a child has been freed for adoption:

1. Sixty days before the end of the month which would constitute the 18th month of continuous foster care or earlier if so directed by the Court in an initial foster care review under Social Services Law Sec. 358-a, or

2. Within six months after the child becomes available for adoption if the child is not yet placed in a prospective adoptive home, or 3. Within 12 months after the child has been placed in a prospective adoptive home and no petition for adoption has been filed, whichever is sooner.

The complicating factor in this case is that a foster care review pursuant to Sec. 392 of the Social Services Law occurred prior to the surrender of the child for adoption by both parents. On February 7, 1990 Monroe County Family Court Judge Hon. Anthony J....