ÿWPCK ò€ʶBªJ‹ÜóeÃF(¤ø 8v첦DŽ‰Ë±nê GøеùÊù¼7¡U ƒéµ[suµN*¿Ë6cië<Ó[ÀÚèziSr³ÙÎ!î{.¤\&Xýr‡¤ç§È³I P–yzk?ÕNâs®)7ŒJ H)ù;˜žÁA•æ>ØØXq‘~zßdÓiݱhÀ»üýdMSL’¸PÙ•ÝM æ®/xŠ‘Rgè’=Bzd?û§Fapó&ýÃØçìqbeŸHˆè‰ ʼ ó 6õ-Ô4ëîü øF±Ë×Ò_¹lû;qÝr>óÂ3Δ‘zd41¼Ïßýª¼0Lâ ʬԃ˃p«`=à SíŚȧÈÓA÷%Å=‚Çç$(°;$0Ó¢òW»ÖŸ[ß³c-Õ×øI HnÝUí∓h‡GÕòŒßˆ¤¢¹»›‰2´ƒi|‘1 HÀS-{_T.”Ÿ~«P 6N‰]eÖ)*êvjxÚa5õž*ø¸à²w DúŽ_ùë–¹^—aŒHä†ß“æÇÑØka²B»²=‘ðÞ+\4Wapé·K.b èÎí^UN$ %r 04x# ¬ t·š+ ^ Å UNÑ N w@! a mc 0¿z b 9 E 4M a U @p †° ¯6 0Dåg)U:’’’’’’’’ AQÌÆ 0Dã 0D' 0Dkk D/¯¯ BÞ D3ûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûû B.(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular»( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlΘc:\COREL\SUITE8\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\CUSTOM~1\OPINION.WPTc:\Corel\Suite8\Template\Custom WP Templates\Custom WP Templates\Opinion.wptÏ€ð&c(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular D‚ƒ„D†‡Eˆ‰ŠÓ€” ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(PG2·d$¤¤Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ€X\LX£»Ôóó- ù - ©yË&ctä„3|x”ô\  `(Times NewRomanTT Ï : ' Ib011c10Ib011c1 .    ¥Ý ƒ ¸œ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚÔ€X $X¤»ÔóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€some€reason€not€apparent€in€the€record,€the€order€denying€Ms.€Boyleððs€second€custodyÐ ° Ðpetition€was€not€entered€until€February€1,€1996,€even€though€the€trial€court€had€denied€the€petitionÏat€the€conclusion€of€the€May€1995€hearing.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ]Ý ƒ ¸œ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚÔ€X $X¤»ÔóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€determined€that€Mr.€Geiger€could€have€visitation€with€Caty€during€springÐ ° Ðbreak,€the€month€of€July,€and€alternatively€for€Thanksgiving€or€Christmas. øÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€»Ž»»»ÔÔ€c­ »»ŽÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€Xƒr X c­ÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€16,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,@ÓÐAZ‹"Arial Regular!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd]]]]'ÿÿdxd dÝ ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€d »»dXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€„/H„»»ÔÑ  Ññ”ññŠñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@E ±` 8ttxPX°ð  rßñŠññ”ññ”ññ”ñÌÌñ”ñßt€ )>.*jx)` `€€@EI–` 8ttxPÎð È tßñ”ñà@¡ ¡ Dàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ €Ð Ðà@ÜÜ)DàAT€NASHVILLEó óˆÐ è8 ÐÔ€¼ä ¼„„/HÔÌÌÌÌGREGORY€GEIGER,à h àà À àà  à)Ð ¨ø  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àPlaintiff/Appellant,à À àà  à)à p àMontgomery€ChanceryÐ Ô$  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àNo.€91„68„159Ð ê:  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð P  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àAppeal€No.Ð f  ÐDAWN€GEIGER€BOYLE,à À àà  à)à p à01A01„9809„CH„00467Ð ,| Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àDefendant/Appellee.à À àà  à)Ð X¨ ÐÌÌÌÌà@ppDàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€MONTGOMERY€COUNTYˆÌà@©©#DàAT€CLARKSVILLE,€TENNESSEEˆÌÌÌà@ù ù DàTHE€HONORABLE€CAROL€A.€CATALANO,€JUDGEˆÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiff/Appellantóó:à À àà  àà p àà È àòòFor€the€Defendant/Appelleeóó:Ð Œ&Ü! ÐÌChristine€Zellar€Churchà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àMart€G.€FendleyÐ ¸($  ÐClarksville,€Tennesseeà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àClarksville,€TennesseeÐ Î)%! ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@%DàÔ‡„/H„¼¼ä Ôò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óÔ#†¼ä ¼„„/Ho #ԈР~2Î-) ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÐ  j:º50 ÐÑ„°Ñà@ÎÎ)DàÔ€„/H„¼¼ä Ôò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óˆÐ ° ÐÔ€¼ä ¼„„/HÔÓ€ÓÌÌà ` àThis€appeal€presents€a€custody€and€visitation€dispute€arising€from€a€failed€jointÏcustody€arrangement.€€The€mother€filed€her€third€petition€for€sole€custody€of€theÏpartiesðð€only€child€five€years€after€the€Chancery€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyÏapproved€a€martial€dissolution€agreement€establishing€joint€custody€with€the€fatherÏhaving€primary€physical€custody.€€Following€a€bench€trial,€the€trial€court€awarded€theÏmother€sole€custody€of€the€child€and€made€provisions€for€the€fatherððs€child€supportÏand€visitation.€€The€father€asserts€on€this€appeal€that€the€evidence€does€not€support€theÏtrial€courtððs€decision.€€Based€on€our€independent€review€of€the€record,€we€cannot€sayÏthat€the€judgment€lacks€an€adequate€evidentiary€foundation.€€Accordingly,€we€affirmÏthe€judgment€granting€sole€custody€to€the€mother.ÌÌà@ùù.Dàò òI.ó óˆÐ E• ÐÌà ` àGregory€Geiger€and€Dawn€Geiger€(now€Dawn€Boyle)€married€in€May€1984€andÏmade€their€home€in€Clarksville.€€At€that€time,€Ms.€Boyle€was€an€officer€on€active€dutyÏwith€the€United€States€Army,€and€Mr.€Geiger€was€employed€with€the€United€StatesÏArmy€Reserve€in€Nashville.€€Their€only€child,€Caty,€was€born€on€February€21,€1988.€ÏThe€marriage€foundered,€and€the€parties€were€divorced€by€the€Chancery€Court€forÏMontgomery€County€in€February1992.€€The€trial€court€adopted€the€partiesðð€maritalÏdissolution€agreement€which€provided€that€they€would€have€joint€custody€of€theirÏdaughter€and€that€Mr.€Geiger€would€have€primary€physical€custody.€€Ms.€BoyleÏreceived€liberal€visitation€rights.€€Shortly€after€the€divorce,€Mr.€Geiger€moved€toÏNashville€to€be€closer€to€his€work.ÌÌà ` àIn€February€1993,€Ms.€Boyle€left€the€Army€married€an€officer€on€active€dutyÏwith€the€Army.€€Also€in€early€1993,€Caty€was€diagnosed€with€Attention€DeficitÏHyperactivity€Disorder€(ADHD).€€Her€symptoms€included€difficulty€concentratingÏor€sitting€still,€disobedience,€impulsiveness,€violent€behavior€and€temper€tantrums,Ïcrying€easily,€and€difficulty€making€friends.€€In€May€1993,€Ms.€Boyle€filed€her€firstÏpetition€for€a€change€of€custody.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion€six€months€laterÏin€November€1993.€€Thereafter,€Ms.€Boyle€and€her€husband€moved€first€to€VirginiaÐ 8:ˆ5A Ðand€then€to€West€Point,€New€York.€€These€moves€caused€Ms.€Boyle€to€spend€less€andÏless€time€with€Caty.ÌÌà ` àMs.€Boyle€gave€birth€to€her€second€child€in€July€1994.€€Four€months€later,€inÏNovember€1994,€she€filed€her€second€petition€seeking€sole€custody€of€Caty.€€The€trialÏcourt€again€denied€Ms.€Boyleððs€petition€at€the€conclusion€of€a€hearing€in€May€1995.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рä 4  ÐMr.€Geiger€married€Lisa€Geiger€in€December€1995.€In€May€1997,€following€theÏretirement€of€the€trial€judge€who€had€presided€over€the€case€since€its€inception,€Ms.ÏBoyle€filed€her€third€petition€seeking€sole€custody€of€Caty.€€ÌÌà ` àThe€hearing€in€May€1998€was€acrimonious.€€Ms.€Boyle€accused€Mr.€Geiger€ofÏfrustrating€and€interfering€with€her€communications€with€Caty€and€of€makingÏsignificant€changes€regarding€Catyððs€schooling€and€treatment€for€ADHD€withoutÏconsulting€her.€€She€also€complained€about€incidents€in€which€Mr.€Geiger€used€coldÏshowers€to€discipline€Caty€or€put€his€hands€over€her€mouth€to€prevent€her€fromÏscreaming.€€Mr.€Geiger€responded€that€he€had€given€Caty€cold€showers€twice€at€herÏpsychologistððs€request€and€asserted€that€Ms.€Boyle€and€her€husband€used€corporalÏpunishment€and€humiliation€to€discipline€Caty.€€Lisa€Geiger,€who€was€then€in€theÏmidst€of€a€bitter€divorce€proceeding€with€Mr.€Geiger,€testified€on€Ms.€Boyleððs€behalfÏabout€the€physical€abuse€she€had€received€from€Mr.€Geiger.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€determined€that€a€material€change€in€circumstances€had€occurredÏbecause€the€partiesðð€joint€custody€arrangement€had€become€unworkable€due€to€theirÏinability€to€cooperate€with€each€other.€€The€trial€court€thereupon€gave€Ms.€Boyle€soleÏcustody€of€Caty€and€concluded€that€it€would€be€in€the€childððs€best€interests€to€limitÏMr.€Geigerððs€visitation.׃`×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trial€court€also€directed€Mr.€Geiger€to€begin€payingÐ ´-)2 Ðchild€support.€€Mr.€Geiger€now€appeals€from€this€order.ÌÌÐ  2ð-8 Їñ€ñÌñ€ñà@ËË.Dàò òII.ó óˆÐ T¤ ÐÌà ` àMr.€Geiger€is€pressing€a€three„prong€attack€on€the€trial€courtððs€decision.€€First,Ïhe€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€terminating€the€joint€custody€arrangementÏbecause€there€had€been€no€unforeseen€material€change€in€circumstances€since€the€trialÏcourt€previously€denied€Ms.€Boyle's€last€petition€for€change€in€custody.€€Second,€heÏasserts€that€even€if€there€were€grounds€to€terminate€the€joint€custody€arrangement,€theÏtrial€court€should€have€awarded€him€sole€custody.€€Third,€Mr.€Geiger€contends€thatÏÔ‡¼x>»»¼x>ÔÔ‡»x>»»¼x>Ôhe€is€entitled€to€more€visitation€with€Caty€than€the€visitation€awarded€by€the€trialÐ tÄ ÐcourtÔ#†»x>»»»x>f#ÔÔ#†¼x>»»»x>…#Ô.Ð h ÐÌà@ÓÓ.Dàò òA.ó óˆÐ `° ÐÌà ` àAppellate€courts€are€reluctant€to€second-guess€a€trial€court's€custody€andÏvisitation€decisions€because€they€often€hinge€on€the€demeanor€and€credibility€ofÏparents€and€witnesses€during€the€hearing.€€òòSee€Gaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€626,Ð ð@  Ð631€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996);€òòD€v.€Kóó,€917€S.W.2d€682,€685€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€Ð ” ä" ÐAccordingly,€we€review€these€decisions€de€novo€on€the€record€with€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€òòSee€Hass€v.€Knightonóó,€676Ð Ü#,& ÐS.W.2d€554,€555€(Tenn.€1984);€òòGaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€631;€òòGriffin€v.Ð €%Ð ( ÐStoneóó,€834€S.W.2d€€300,€301€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€Ð $'t"* ÐÌà ` àCourts€should€devise€custody€arrangements€that€promote€the€child'sÏrelationship€with€both€parents€and€that€interfere€as€little€as€possible€with€post-divorceÏfamily€decision-making.€€òòSee€Aaby€v.€Strangeóó,€924€S.W.2d€623,€629€(Tenn.€1996);€Ð ´-)2 ÐòòTaylor€v.€Tayloróó,€849€S.W.2d€319,€331-32€(Tenn.€1993);€òòVarley€v.€Varleyóó,€934Ð X/¨*4 ÐS.W.2d€659,€668€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€These€decisions€are€not€made€to€reward€orÏpunish€parents.€€òòSee€Sutherland€v.€Sutherlandóó,€831€S.W.2d€283,€286€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð  2ð-8 Ð1991);€òòBarnhill€v.€Barnhillóó,€826€S.W.2d€443,€453€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€Thus,€theÐ D4”/: Ðparentsðð€interests€are€secondary€to€those€of€the€children.€€òòSee€Doles€v.€Dolesóó,€848Ð è581< ÐS.W.2d€656,€661€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);€€òòGriffin€v.€Stoneóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€302.Ð Œ7Ü2> ÐÌÐ Ô:$6B ЇÔ_ÔññÌññÔ_Ôà ` àCourts€recognize€children's€need€for€continuity€in€their€relationships€withÏfamily€and€friends.€€òòSeeóó€òòHill€v.€Robbinsóó,€859€S.W.2d€355,€358-59€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð T¤ Ð1993);€€òòContreras€v.€Wardóó,€831€S.W.2d€288,€290€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€To€protectÐ øH Ðagainst€unnecessary€upheaval,€custody€and€visitation€decisions,€once€made€andÏimplemented,€are€res€judicata€upon€facts€existing,€or€reasonably€foreseeable€when€theÏdecision€was€made.€€òòSee€Young€v.€Smithóó,€193€Tenn.€480,€485,€246€S.W.2d€93,€95Ð ä 4  Ð(1952);€€òòIn€re€Parsonsóó,€914€S.W.2d€889,€893€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€Ð ˆØ  ÐÌà ` àHowever,€courts€must€modify€a€custody€arrangement€if€the€party€seekingÏmodification€proves€(1)€that€the€child's€circumstances€have€materially€changed€in€aÏway€that€was€not€reasonably€foreseeable€at€the€time€of€the€original€custody€decision,Ð h Ðòòsee€Smith€v.€Haaseóó,€521€S.W.2d€49,€50€(Tenn.€1975);€€òòMcDaniel€v.€McDanielóó,€743Ð ¼  ÐS.W.2d€167,€169€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987),€and€(2)€that€changing€the€existing€custodyÏarrangement€will€serve€the€child's€best€interests.€€òòSee€Seessel€v.€Seesselóó,€748€S.W.2dÐ T Ð422,€429€(Tenn.€1988);€òòHall€v.€Hallóó,€No.€01A01„9310„PB„00465,€1995€WL€316255,Ð ¨ø Ðat€*€2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€25,€1995)€(No€Tenn.€€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).ÌÌà@ÙÙ.Dàò òB.ó óˆÐ ” ä" ÐÌà ` àWe€turn€first€to€Mr.€Geigerððs€assertion€that€there€have€been€no€unforeseenÏmaterial€changes€in€the€partiesðð€and€the€childððs€circumstances€since€the€previousÏcustody€decision.€€There€are€no€hard€and€fast€rules€for€determining€what€constitutesÏa€material€change€in€circumstances.€€òòSee€Taylor€v.€Tayloróó,€849€S.W.2d€at€327;Ð È($, ÐòòDantzler€v.€Dantzleróó,€665€S.W.2d€385,€387€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983).€€As€a€generalÐ l*¼%. Ðmatter,€the€change€must€involve€the€occurrence€of€facts€or€circumstances€after€theÏentry€of€the€order€sought€to€be€modified,€òòsee€Turner€v.€Turneróó,€776€S.W.2d€88,€90Ð ´-)2 Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1988),€that€were€not€known€or€anticipated€at€the€time€and€that€affectÏthe€child's€well-being€in€a€material€way.€€òòSee€Dalton€v.€Daltonóó,€858€S.W.2d€324,€326Ð ü0L,6 Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòDailey€v.€Daileyóó,€635€S.W.2d€391,€393€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981).Ð  2ð-8 ÐÌñ~ñÌÌñ~ñà ` àThe€success€or€failure€of€joint€custody€arrangements€normally€depends€on€theÏparentsðð€continuing€ability€to€cooperate€with€each€other,€Ô‡¼x>»»¼x>ÔÔ‡»x>»»¼x>Ôòòsee€Jones€v.€Jonesóó,€No.Ð Œ7Ü2> Ð01A01„9601„CV„00038,€1996€WL€512030,€at€*5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€11,€1996Ô#†»x>»»»x>œ/#ÔÔ‡»x>»»»x>ÔÔ#†¼x>»»»x>»/#ÔÔ‡»x>»»¼x>Ô)€(NoÐ 09€4@ ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed);€òòDix€v.€CarsonóóÔ#†»x>»»»x>x0#ÔÔ‡»x>»»»x>ÔÔ#†¼x>»»»x>º0#ÔÔ‡»x>»»¼x>Ô,€No.€02A01„9704„CV„00093,Ð Ô:$6B Ð1998€WL€886555,€at€*11€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€17,€1998)€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.Ð ° ÐJune€21,€1999),€and€these€arrangements€often€flounder€when€the€parties€are€no€longerÏable€to€cooperate.€€Ô#†»x>»»»x>Q1#ÔÔ#†¼x>»»»x>“1#ÔSòòee€Gray€v.€Grayóó,€885€S.W.2d€353,€355€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994),Ð øH ÐòòMalone€v.€Maloneóó,€842€S.W.2d€621,€623€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992),€òòDodd€v.€Doddóó,€737Ð œ ì ÐS.W.2d€286,€289-90€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987).€€The€fact€that€a€once€satisfactory€jointÏcustody€arrangement€has€become€unworkable€can€constitute€a€material€change€ofÏcircumstances€sufficient€to€reopen€the€issue€of€custody.€€òòSee€Rubin€v.€Kirshneróó,€948Ð ˆØ  ÐS.W.2d€742,€745„46€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997);òò€Dalton€v.€Daltonóó,€858€S.W.2d€at€326;òòÐ ,|  ÐGilliam€v.€Jonesóó,€No.€01A01„9801„CH„00031,€1998€WL€888931,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð Ð  ÐApp.€Dec.€22,€1998)ñ†ñ€(Nñ†ññ‡ññ†ñ€ñ†ññ‡ññˆño€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)ñˆñ;€òòCheek€v.€Cheekóó,€No.Ð tÄ Ð03A01„9503„CV„00092,€1995€WL€507793,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€29,€1995)Ïòòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€Jan.€8,€1996).€€The€fact€that€another€trial€court€hadÐ ¼  Ðpreviously€declined€to€set€aside€a€joint€custody€arrangement€does€not€foreclose€a€trialÏcourt€from€later€addressing€the€same€issue€based€on€different€facts€arising€in€theÏmeantime.€ÌÌà ` àAs€with€any€change€in€material€circumstances,€the€unworkability€of€a€jointÏcustody€arrangement€must€directly€implicate€the€childððs€welfare.€€It€is€not€enough€thatÏthe€parents€begin€to€like€each€other€less€because€of€the€passage€of€time€or€becauseÏthey€enter€into€new€personal€relationships.€€The€party€seeking€to€replace€the€jointÏcustody€arrangement€with€another€form€of€custody€must€show€that€the€breakdown€inÏthe€parentsðð€relations€is€affecting€the€child.€€For€example,€one€parent€may€beÏinterfering€with€the€childððs€relationship€with€the€other€parent€or€may€be€makingÏsignificant€decisions€involving€the€child€without€consulting€the€other€parent.€€ÌÌà ` àMr.€Geiger€did€not€seriously€dispute€Ms.€Boyleððs€assertion€that€the€jointÏcustody€arrangement,€as€the€parties€originally€envisioned€it,€was€no€longer€working.€ÏThe€evidence€shows€that,€since€the€entry€of€the€order€denying€Ms.€Boyleððs€secondÏcustody€petition,€the€parties€have€not€cooperated€to€promote€Catyððs€welfare.€€Mr.ÏGeiger€failed€to€return€messages€left€by€Ms.€Boyle€when€she€was€trying€to€reach€Caty,Ïmonitored€or€tape€recorded€Ms.€Boyleððs€telephone€conversations€with€Caty,€and,Ïaccording€to€Ms.€Boyle,€intercepted€and€censored€her€mail€to€Caty.€€In€addition,€Mr.ÏGeiger€made€significant€decisions€regarding€Caty€without€consulting€Ms.€Boyle,€suchÏas€changing€or€discontinuing€Catyððs€ADHD€medications,€discontinuing€herÐ Ô:$6B Ðcounseling€sessions,€and€changing€her€school.€€In€addition,€Mr.€Geiger€asserted€thatÏMs.€Boyle€refused€to€cooperate€in€arranging€convenient€visitation.€ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€weighed€this€testimony,€as€well€as€the€testimony€of€the€otherÏwitnesses,€and€concluded€that€the€joint€custody€arrangement€was€no€longer€workable.€ÏThe€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€this€conclusion,€and€accordingly€weÏaffirm€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€reconsider€the€joint€custody€arrangement.€ÌÌà@ÓÓ.Dàò òC.ó óˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà ` àAnticipating€that€we€would€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€a€material€changeÏin€circumstances,€Mr.€Geiger€next€argues€that€he€is€comparatively€more€fit€to€haveÏcustody€of€Caty€and,€therefore,€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€award€him€soleÏcustody.€€We€have€determined€that€the€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððs€decision€toÏaward€custody€to€Ms.€Boyle,€even€though€Mr.€Geiger€has€had€primary€physicalÏcustody€of€the€child€since€1992.ÌÌà ` àOnce€a€court€finds€that€there€has€been€a€material€change€in€circumstances,€itÏmust€decide€whether€changing€the€existing€custody€arrangement€is€in€the€childððs€bestÏinterests.€€This€determination€is€factually€driven€and€requires€the€court€to€carefullyÏweigh€many€considerations.€€òòSee€Gaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€630.€€TheseÐ €%Ð ( Ðconsiderations€includeÌÓ€Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àthe€age,€habits,€mental€and€emotional€make-up€of€the€childÏand€those€parties€competing€for€custody;€the€education€andÏexperience€of€those€seeking€to€raise€the€child;€theirÏcharacter€and€propensities€as€evidenced€by€their€pastÏconduct;€the€financial€and€physical€circumstances€availableÏin€the€home€of€each€party€seeking€custody€and€the€specialÏrequirements€of€the€child;€the€availability€and€extent€ofÏthird-party€support;€the€associations€and€influences€toÏwhich€the€child€is€most€likely€to€be€exposed€in€theÏalternatives€afforded,€both€positive€and€negative;€andÏwhere€is€the€greater€likelihood€of€an€environment€for€theÏchild€of€love,€warmth,€stability,€support,€consistency,€careÏand€concern,€and€physical€and€spiritual€nurture.€€Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÓ€ÁBÓÌòòBah€v.€Bahóó,€668€S.W.2d€663,€666€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ¤8ô3; Ð36-6-106€(Supp.1998).Ð H:˜5= Їà ` àParents€competing€for€custody€are€human€beings€with€their€own€unique€virtuesÏand€vices.€€òòSee€Gaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€630.€€Accordingly,€the€courts€do€notÐ T¤ Ðexpect€a€parent€to€prove€that€he€or€she€is€perfect,€òòsee€Bah€v.€Bahóó,€668€S.W.2d€at€666;Ð øH ÐòòEdwards€v.€Edwardsóó,€501€S.W.2d€283,€290-91€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973),€or€that€theÐ œ ì Ðother€parent€is€completely€unfit.€€òòSee€Griffin€v.€Stoneóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€305;€òòHarris€v.Ð @  ÐHarrisóó,€832€S.W.2d€352,€353€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€Instead,€courts€analyze€theÐ ä 4  Ð"comparative€fitness"€of€the€parents€to€determine€which€of€the€available€custodiansÏis€comparatively€more€fit€than€the€other€at€the€time€of€the€hearing.€€òòSee€In€re€Parsonsóó,Ð ,|  Ð914€S.W.2d€at€893;€òòBah€v.€Bahóó,€668€S.W.2d€at€666.€Ð Ð  ÐÌà ` àContinuity€of€placement€and€stability€are€important€considerations€in€theseÏcases.€€òòSee€Ô‡¼x>»»¼x>ÔTaylor€v.€Tayloróó,€849€S.W.2d€at€328;Ô#†¼x>»»¼x>‰J#Ôòò€Adelsperger€v.€Adelspergeróó,€970Ð ¼  ÐS.W.2d€482,€485€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997);Ô‡¼x>»»¼x>Ô€òòContreras€v.€Wardóó,€831€S.W.2d€at€290;Ð `° ÐòòÔ#†¼x>»»¼x>SK#ÔMcDaniel€v.€McDanielóó,€743€S.W.2d€at€169;Ô‡¼x>»»¼x>Ô€National€Interdisciplinary€ColloquiumÐ T Ðon€Child€Custody,€òòÔ#†¼x>»»¼x>L#ÔLegal€and€Mental€Health€Perspectives€on€Child€Custody€Law:€AÐ ¨ø ÐDeskbook€for€Judgesóóñ„ñ,ñ„ñ€ðð€5:1,€at€51€(1998)Ô‡¼x>»»¼x>Ô.€€Yet,€continuity€does€not€trump€all€otherÐ Lœ Ðconsiderations.€€Depending€on€the€circumstances,€the€parent€who€has€been€acting€asÏthe€primary€caregiver€is€not€necessarily€more€fit€than€the€other€parentÔ#†¼x>»»¼x>M#ÔÔ‡¼x>»»¼x>Ô€to€haveÐ ” ä" Ðpermanent€custody.€€òòSee€Gaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€630„31.Ð 8"ˆ$ ÐÌà ` àRaising€Caty€requires€much€patience€and€time€because€of€her€ADHD.€€She€willÏalso€benefit€from€increased€socialization.€€The€Boyles€can€provide€all€three.€€Ms.ÏBoyle€is€an€available€parent€who€has€devoted€herself€full€time€to€caring€for€herÏchildren.€€Caty€already€has€a€relationship€with€Ms.€Boyleððs€other€two€children€andÏspending€more€time€with€her€siblings€may€have€a€socializing€effect€on€Caty.€€Mr.ÏGeigerððs€recent€bitter€divorce€from€Lisa€Geiger€has€made€his€home€a€less€stable€andÏless€happy€environment€than€in€the€past.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€found€that€Mr.€Geiger€and€Ms.€Boyle€were€equally€fit€parents,Ïand€stressed€that€the€custody€decision€was€ð ðnot€an€easy€call€to€make.ðð€€We€agree.€€TheÏtrial€courtððs€decision€is€not€a€reflection€on€the€parents€or€on€Mr.€Geigerððs€parentingÏefforts€between€1992€and€1998.€€Rather€it€is€the€trial€courtððs€effort€to€serve€Catyððs€bestÏâ âinterests.€€BÔ#†¼x>»»¼x>;N#ÔÔ‡¼x>»»¼x>Ôased€on€our€review€of€the€record,€we€cannot€say€that€the€evidenceÐ 09€4@ Ðpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that,€on€balance,€living€with€her€motherÏbest€serves€Catyððs€interests.Ìâ âÌà ` àThe€results€of€our€review€of€the€evidentiary€foundation€of€the€trial€courtððsÏopinion€is€reinforced€by€the€practical€recognition€that€Ô_ÔCatyÔ_Ô€ñ‚ñhasñ‚ññ‚ñwhoñ‚ñ€been€living€with€theÏBoyles€in€New€York€since€June€1998.€€Continuity€and€stability€are€important€forÏchildren,€and€even€more€important€for€children€like€Ô_ÔCatyÔ_Ô€ñƒñwhoñƒññƒñthatñƒñ€have€ADHD.€€BecauseÏher€condition€can€be€worsened€by€additional€conflict€and€change,€allowing€theÏcustody€arrangement€that€has€been€in€place€since€June€1998€likewise€serves€CatyððsÏbest€interests.€€Ô#†¼x>»»¼x>§R#ÔÐ tÄ ÐÌà@ÓÓ.Dàò òD.ó óˆÐ ¼  ÐÌà ` àAs€a€final€matter,€Mr.€Geiger€argues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€awarded€Ïhim€more€visitation€with€Caty.€€The€trial€court€awarded€Mr.€Geiger€visitation€threeÏtimes€a€year.€€Caty€is€to€see€Mr.€Geiger€during€spring€break,€for€one€month€during€theÏsummer,€and€either€at€Thanksgiving€or€at€Christmas.€€Mr.€Geiger€seeks€visitation€forÏthe€entire€summer€and€more€visitation€during€the€Christmas€holiday.ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€concluded€that€it€was€ð ðin€the€bests€interests€of€the€minor€childÏto€limit€the€fatherððs€visitation.ðð€€Even€though€the€trial€court€did€not€explain€its€basisÏfor€this€finding,€we€assume€that€it€stemmed€from€the€relationship€between€Mr.€GeigerÏand€Caty€as€it€existed€at€the€time€of€the€May€1998€hearing.€€This€record€provides€usÏwith€no€basis€to€second„guess€the€trial€courtððs€decision€based€on€the€facts€at€handÏwhen€the€decision€was€made.€€However,€promoting€a€healthy€relationship€between€theÏchild€and€both€parents€is€an€important€consideration.€€òòSee€Aaby€v.€Strangeóó,€924Ð ´-)2 ÐS.W.2d€at€629;€òòTaylor€v.€Tayloróó,€849€S.W.2d€at€331„32;€òòVarley€v.€Varleyóó,€934€S.W.2dÐ X/¨*4 Ðat€668.€€òòóóNow€that€the€new€custody€and€visitation€arrangement€has€been€in€place€forÐ ü0L,6 Ðapproximately€one€year,€it€may€be€appropriate€to€revisit€the€visitation€issue€toÏdetermine€whether€it€would€be€appropriate€to€increase€Mr.€Geigerððs€visitation.€ÏHowever,€we€leave€these€matters€to€the€parties€and€the€trial€court.ÌññÌÌññÐ Ô:$6B Ðà@-Dàò òIII.ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà ` àWe€affirm€the€judgment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€whateverÏfurther€proceedings€may€be€required.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€to€GregoryÏGeiger€and€his€surety€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.ÌÌÌÓ€Óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à______________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,ÌPRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.€ÌÌÌÌ________________________________ÌWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEñ‰ñ€Ð  |Ì ÐÑ8€x>»»d»»d8ÑÔ€„D„»¼x>Ôà@  Dàò òÔ‡ ž!»¼x>ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@ZZ)DàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†„D„! ž¸_#Ôó óˆÐ òB ÐÔ€¼x>»„„DÔÌÌÌGREGORY€GEIGER,à h àà À àà  à)Ð | Ì Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àPlaintiff/Appellant,à À àà  à)à p àMontgomery€ChanceryÐ ¬ ü Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àNo.€91„68„159Ð Ä   ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð Ü,  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àAppeal€No.Ð ôD  ÐDAWN€GEIGER€BOYLE,à À àà  à)à p à01A01„9809„CH„00467Ð  \  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àDefendant/Appellee.à À àà  à)Ð <Œ  ÐÌÌÌà@cc(DàÔ€ ž!»¼x>Ôòòò òJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€Tóóó óˆÐ œì ÐÔ€¼x>»! žÔÓ€ÓÌà ` àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€theÏMontgomery€County€Chancery€Court,€the€briefs€of€the€parties,€and€the€arguments€ofÏcounsel.€€Upon€consideration€of€the€entire€record,€this€court€finds€and€concludes€thatÏthe€trial€court's€judgment€should€be€affirmed.ÌÌà ` àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€filed€contemporaneously€with€this€judgment,Ïit€is,€therefore,€ordered,€adjudged,€and€decreed€that€the€trial€court's€judgment€be€andÏis€hereby€affirmed,€and€that€the€cause€be€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€furtherÏproceedings€consistent€with€this€court's€opinion.ÌÌà ` àIt€is€further€ordered€that€the€costs€of€this€appeal€be€taxed€to€Gregory€Geiger,Ïprincipal,€and€Christine€Zellar€Church,€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.ÌÌÓ€Óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGE€ñ‰ñ