A New York court has ruled to terminate the parental rights of a father, Damon H., regarding his child, Kal-el F., due to findings of permanent neglect. This decision, made by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York on June 26, 2026, is significant as it impacts the child's future and the father's rights as a parent.
The ruling came after a legal battle initiated by the Erie County Department of Social Services, which sought to terminate Damon H.'s parental rights under Social Services Law § 384-b. The court found that the father failed to engage adequately with services designed to help him reunite with his child, ultimately leading to the decision to sever his parental rights.
The case began when the Erie County Department of Social Services filed a petition against Damon H. The agency aimed to address concerns about the father's ability to provide a safe and stable environment for his child, Kal-el F. The court proceedings revealed a history of neglect and a lack of participation from the father in the services offered to him. The case was escalated to the Appellate Division after Damon H. appealed a Family Court decision made on July 29, 2025, which had already ruled in favor of terminating his parental rights.
In its ruling, the Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision. The judges, including Curran, Bannister, Montour, Greenwood, and Hannah, found that the Erie County Department of Social Services had made diligent efforts to support the father in maintaining a relationship with his child. The court stated, "Petitioner established that it exercised diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the father's relationship with the child." These efforts included providing counseling, facilitating visitation, and offering other services aimed at helping the father overcome challenges that prevented him from caring for his child.
The court emphasized that while the agency made significant attempts to assist the father, he ultimately failed to take the necessary steps to improve his situation. The opinion noted that the father did not successfully complete or participate in any of the court-ordered services and had not seen his child in person for five years. The court highlighted that the father participated in only one virtual visitation and was generally indifferent to further engagement.
In addition, the court found that the father had not made adequate plans for the child's future. The ruling stated, "the father failed to plan appropriately for the child's future," underscoring the importance of parental responsibility in such cases. The judges concluded that the father's inaction and lack of commitment to addressing the issues that led to the child's removal justified the termination of his parental rights.
The impact of this ruling is significant for both Damon H. and Kal-el F. The decision effectively ends the father's legal relationship with his child, allowing the child to continue living with his maternal grandfather, who has expressed a desire to adopt him. This ruling reinforces the court's commitment to prioritizing the best interests of the child in custody and parental rights cases.
Moving forward, this case sets a precedent for similar situations where a parent fails to engage with services intended to facilitate reunification with their child. It highlights the importance of parental responsibility and the need for parents to actively participate in efforts to correct the issues that led to their child's removal. The ruling may serve as a warning to other parents in similar circumstances that neglecting their responsibilities can have serious consequences.
As for the future of this case, Damon H. has the option to appeal the decision further, although details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case may influence other pending cases involving parental rights and child welfare in New York.