In re Temple S.M.
Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the children’s future (see Matter of Jamie M., 63 NY2d 388, 393 [1984]; Matter of Orlando F., 40 NY2d 103, 110 [1976]; Matter of Kyshawn F. [Nellie M.-F.], 95 AD3d 883 [2012]; Matter of Malen Sansa V. [Nancy J.], 70 AD3d 707, 708 [2010]; Matter of Fatima G., 64 AD3d 652, 653 [2009]; Matter of Noelia T., 61 AD3d 983, 984 [2009]; Matter of Rosanette O., 291 AD2d 237 [2002]). Furthermore, the Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the subject children to terminate the mother’s parental rights (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d at 147; Matter of Kyshawn F. [Nellie M.-F.], 95 AD3d 883 [2012]; Matter of Malen Sansa V. [Nancy J.], 70 AD3d at 708; cf. Matter of Renelle S., 288 AD2d 229, 230 [2001]).
Dillon, J.P., Belen, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.