You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

In re Darlene I.

Citations: 251 A.D.2d 16; 674 N.Y.S.2d 12; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6403

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; June 2, 1998; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves the termination of parental rights by the Family Court of Bronx County, presided over by Judge Rhoda Cohen. The respondent-appellant's rights were terminated due to a finding of permanent neglect under Social Services Law § 384-b (7). The court committed the children to the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services for adoption. The appellate court unanimously affirmed this decision, observing that the petitioner agency made diligent efforts to support the respondent-appellant's relationship with his children, which the appellant failed to reciprocate. Specifically, the appellant visited the children only eight times over fifteen months and failed to plan for their future. The appellant also did not complete court-mandated programs, including drug treatment, parenting skills, and domestic violence counseling. The appellate court found that the evidence supporting the Family Court’s determination was clear and convincing. The decision was concurred by Justices Ellerin, Wallach, Tom, Mazzarelli, and Saxe, ultimately resulting in the termination of the respondent-appellant's parental rights and paving the way for the children's adoption.

Legal Issues Addressed

Diligent Efforts by Petitioner Agency

Application: The petitioner agency made diligent efforts to facilitate the respondent-appellant’s relationship with the children, which the appellate court recognized in affirming the termination of parental rights.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed this decision unanimously, noting that the petitioner agency had made diligent efforts to strengthen the respondent-appellant’s relationship with his children.

Failure to Comply with Court-Ordered Programs

Application: The respondent-appellant's failure to complete required programs such as drug treatment, parenting skills, and domestic violence counseling contributed to the finding of permanent neglect.

Reasoning: Additionally, the appellant did not provide evidence of completing required programs, including drug treatment, parenting skills, and domestic violence counseling.

Termination of Parental Rights under Social Services Law § 384-b (7)

Application: The court applied Social Services Law § 384-b (7) to terminate parental rights due to the respondent-appellant's permanent neglect, as evidenced by inadequate contact and planning for the children's future.

Reasoning: The Family Court's determination of permanent neglect under Social Services Law § 384-b (7) was supported by clear and convincing evidence.