Narrative Opinion Summary
The father appeals a Family Court order from Queens County, dated July 24, 1995, which found him to have permanently neglected his child, leading to the termination of his parental rights and the child's placement in the custody and guardianship of St. Christopher-Ottilie for adoption purposes. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, citing clear and convincing evidence that supported the conclusion of permanent neglect. Despite the efforts made by St. Christopher-Ottilie to foster the parent-child relationship, the father failed to make substantial and continuous plans for his son's future for over a year, as required by Social Services Law § 384-b. The decision was supported by precedents, including Matter of Gregory B. and Matter of Carmen N. The appellate judges concurred in the affirmation without costs or disbursements.
Legal Issues Addressed
Precedential Support for Termination of Parental Rightssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision was supported by precedents, indicating that similar conclusions were reached in prior cases involving parental neglect.
Reasoning: The decision was supported by precedents, including Matter of Gregory B. and Matter of Carmen N.
Standard of Proof for Permanent Neglectsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision based on clear and convincing evidence demonstrating the father's permanent neglect of his child.
Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, citing clear and convincing evidence that supported the conclusion of permanent neglect.
Termination of Parental Rights under Social Services Law § 384-bsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court concluded that the father's failure to make substantial and continuous plans for his child's future for over a year constituted permanent neglect, leading to the termination of his parental rights.
Reasoning: Despite the efforts made by St. Christopher-Ottilie to foster the parent-child relationship, the father failed to make substantial and continuous plans for his son's future for over a year, as required by Social Services Law § 384-b.