In the Matter of Sandy G.G.D. v. Luis R.B.G.
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Family court guardianship and Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) findings
Family Court dismissed the mother's guardianship petition and denied special findings for SIJS, reasoning that the adult child could not give knowing consent.
The Appellate Division unanimously reversed, reinstated the petition, and granted guardianship and SIJS special findings nunc pro tunc.
The child's profound disabilities make him incapable of giving consent; the Attorney for the Child is authorized to consent via substituted judgment under 22 NYCRR 7.2(d) [rule governing attorneys for children, authorizing substituted judgment and advocacy on the child's behalf] and Family Court Act § 661 [Family Court authority over guardianship of persons under 21 and related consent framework]. SIJS requirements under 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J) [federal provision defining Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and the required state juvenile court findings] were met: the child was under 21 and unmarried; reunification with the father was not viable due to his death; and return to Venezuela was not in the child's best interests. The dependency requirement is satisfied per 8 CFR 204.11(c)(6) [USCIS regulation requiring the juvenile be declared dependent on a juvenile court].
Background
Petitioner mother sought guardianship of her severely disabled, nonverbal 20-year-old son until age 21. They fled Venezuela in 2017 due to the inability to obtain necessary medications. The mother is the child's sole caregiver. The Attorney for the Child supported guardianship using substituted judgment due to the child's incapacity.
Lower Court Decision
Family Court dismissed the guardianship petition and denied the motion for SIJS special findings, focusing on the child's inability to provide knowing consent.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division reversed on the law and facts, reinstated the petition, and granted guardianship to the mother and SIJS special findings nunc pro tunc. The court held that the child's profound disabilities render him incapable of consent, that the Attorney for the Child could consent on his behalf via substituted judgment under 22 NYCRR 7.2(d) and Family Court Act § 661, that guardianship is in the child's best interests, and that SIJS criteria under 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J) and the dependency requirement under 8 CFR 204.11(c)(6) were satisfied.
Legal Significance
Clarifies that a profoundly disabled young adult's incapacity does not bar guardianship when the Attorney for the Child can provide substituted judgment, and that such a guardianship can satisfy the dependency component for SIJS findings. Reinforces that death of a parent can establish nonviability of reunification and that best-interest analysis may consider lack of caregivers and access to medical care in the home country.
Where a young adult is profoundly disabled, the Attorney for the Child may consent to guardianship via substituted judgment, enabling necessary SIJS findings; incapacity to consent does not defeat guardianship or SIJS eligibility when statutory criteria and best interests are met.