Clear and convincing evidence established that respondent permanently neglected her child when she did not visit the child for a period of over two years after the child was placed in foster care ( Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 142-143). The agency's obligation to exercise diligent efforts was excused due to respondent's failure to apprise the agency of her whereabouts for a period well in excess of six months (Social Services Law § 384-b [e]; Matter of Adrianna Leshawn B., 208 A.D.2d 472, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 806). The child's best interests were served by terminating respondent's parental rights and freeing her for adoption by her maternal aunt, and the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to suspend judgment. "Although respondent expressed a desire to care for the child, the evidence established that the child had been adversely affected by [her] belated attempts at parenting" ( Matter of Shannel Marie M., 198 A.D.2d 55, 56, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 665).
Nor were respondent's due process rights violated where some brief testimony was taken in her absence as this argument was not preserved for appellant review, and she has shown no prejudice resulting from the court's action ( supra).
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.