ÿWPC ¾jU§dkªäºž÷ïFÛÖ68ýåþm>(ŽÝ¡ÄE¸½ '¢… #Éìj\Üîõ5`ºÉ\uðX9>ð(¼… G`K,F±ÎöÚŒÁ˜£7B3`\[.ˆÁYö\£ $’ð½hÌÁTNcÑ‚ •ÑvŠæ»"B‡×”æðï/:ZwMæ½å±¾ˆ4Û"ÌÆƒ¶ ¥{ÈLýUU —èÿ’­ß6Ø"8n?5$±?¥lié$ÙÖ0tÅy:àl5…0ÉŸ*L»åVt\sxý³¥lYnHîUN ûŒC§„áçJ» Vƒô6ª;ª4FFóÆž’õuäûE;À/dd"ü&:ðí–!kÒ†xlÌÕ+ÔÆa5Á’’Ò>ôT4,5± 0ÕlL}<é4¤þSôg —ú,9¦s}™þ»ÃóŒ«wÚUÚÚn‡³™>?òAs=*7TÜÁÛ]Žx¯)-mò2&&š(H¡_ÁÉÁ”XãÑÃZP”4ý¦ ×41ܱÃÇç.Ë#±n¶š’ôD…œ8…KupÌÖMå2s¤‘ épí&z3fÑ-¿â›Xüþ³1Aä³+ôÑ~Ã¥è¼Xü}–|5$|ÊúO‚÷åÑ4†uàá¶ß'"ß^±óíæÀõ™·b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë ë N±U @³³Eóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóóbõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõõ 0ëýýýý Bèè 0¤ D3© D-Ü 0K   ASTƧ 0¤m 0D A«U˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»˜L+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularj5+W_CO~1‘£ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2tt$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R5»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôúò»»Ô d(|3G{$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R5»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G{$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R5»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€R5»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼R5»»»ÔÑ8€ XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼R5»»¼R5Ôà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îRˆî»¼R5ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼R5»îîRˆ+#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJune€26,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X X»¼R5ÔÌò òÔ#†¼R5»XX #ÔòòIn€re:€Adoption€of€A.€K.€S.€R.€and€A.€T.€S.€R.óóÔ‡X X»¼R5Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Cheatham€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€10387€€€€€€Leonard€W.€Martin,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„03081„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€12,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€appeal€stems€from€a€petition€by€both€a€paternal€aunt€and€the€foster€parents€to€adopt€twenty„Ð xÈ  Ðmonth„old€twin€girls.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€paternal€aunt€should€adopt€the€children€becauseÐ d´ Ðrelatives€have€preference€over€non„relatives€in€adoption€proceedings€and€the€foster€parents€did€notÐ P  Ðmeet€the€terms€of€the€contract€they€signed€with€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services.€€We€reverseÐ <Œ Ðthe€decision€of€the€trial€court€and€grant€the€petition€of€the€foster€parents.Ð (x ÐÓÒÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Ð P ÐReversed€and€Remandedó ó€Ð ì< ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼R5»àX ‹#ÔÔ‡X X.¼R5ÔBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€B.€Cainóó€andÐ È ÐòòPatricia€J.€Cottrellóó,€joined.Ð ´ ÐÌPaul€A.€Rutherford,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€appellants,€Ô_ÔGlendonÔ_Ô€Todd€Williams€and€Donna€ElaineÐ ŒÜ ÐWilliams.Ð xÈ ÐÌAndrew€R.€Ô_ÔTillmanÔ_Ô€and€Summer€H.€Stevens,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€appellee,€Robbie€Fulford.Ð P   ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Elizabeth€C.€Driver,€Assistant€Attorney€General,Ð ("x! Ðfor€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee,€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services.Ð #d" ÐÌÓÃÓò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼R5»XX ò#ÔÔ‡X X»¼R5ÔÐ ì$< $ ÐòòóóÔ#†¼R5»XX ! #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X X»¼R5ÔÌÓ  Óò òI.ó óÐ Ä&"& ÐÓª ÓÌà  àA.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.,€twin€girls,€were€born€prematurely€on€April€1,€1999.€€On€April€13,Ð œ(ì#( Ð1999,€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services€(ð ðDCSðð)€petitioned€for€custody.€€After€receivingÐ ˆ)Ø$) Ðcustody,€DCS€searched€for€a€temporary€placement€for€the€girls.€€DCS€initially€approached€theÐ t*Ä%* Ðappellee,€Robbie€Fulford,€who€is€the€childrenððs€paternal€aunt€and€had€previously€adopted€the€twinsððÐ `+°&+ Ðolder€brother.€€She€stated€that€she€did€not€feel€up€to€caring€for€their€brother€and€the€twins.€€DCS€thenÐ L,œ', Ðconsidered€the€maternal€grandmother,€who€lived€in€Florida.€€Appellee€supplied€information€to€DCSÐ 8-ˆ(-ý Ðthat€helped€them€determine€that€the€grandmother€was€not€a€suitable€placement.€€However,€appelleeÐ ° Ðstill€did€not€want€to€bring€the€girls€into€her€home.€€DCS€then€placed€the€children€in€the€foster€homeÐ œì Ðof€the€appellants,€Todd€and€Donna€Williams€on€April€19,€1999.€€The€appellants€signed€two€ChildÐ ˆØ ÐPlacement€Contracts€(the€ð ðContractsðð)€with€DCS,€one€for€each€child.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àIn€March€of€2000,€appellee€contacted€DCS€and€informed€them€that€she€wished€to€adopt€theÐ L œ Ðgirls.€€DCS€informed€the€appellants€that€they€planned€to€place€the€twins€with€appellee€upon€approvalÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€a€home€study.€€DCS€did€a€home€study€and€found€appellee€a€suitable€permanent€placement.€€DCSÐ $ t Ðinformed€the€appellants€on€April€19,€2000€of€its€decision€that€appellee€would€be€given€permanentÐ  ` Ðcustody€of€the€twins.€€DCS€then€created€a€plan€for€transferring€custody.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€appellants€filed€a€Petition€for€Termination€of€Parental€Rights€and€a€Petition€for€AdoptionÐ Ô$  Ðon€April€25,€2000€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Cheatham€County.€€Appellee€filed€an€intervening€petitionÐ À  Ðon€the€same€date.€€DCS€also€filed€an€intervening€petition€on€May€26,€2000.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àWhile€awaiting€action€in€the€chancery€court,€DCS€notified€appellants€on€July€7,€2000€of€theirÐ „Ô  Ðintent€to€move€the€children€to€appellee.€€Appellants€appealed€this€decision€to€an€administrative€judgeÐ pÀ Ðwho€upheld€DCSððs€decision.€€The€chancery€court€then€ordered€that€the€twinsðð€placement€and€theÐ \¬ Ðvisitation€schedule€remain€as€it€was.€€The€children€continued€to€reside€with€the€appellants€and€haveÐ H˜ Ðextended€overnight€visitation€with€appellee.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€chancery€court€then€held€a€bifurcated€hearing€to€address€both€petitions€November€16,Ð  \ Ð2000.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€Petition€for€Termination€of€Parental€Rights.€€The€trial€court€thenÐ øH Ðturned€to€the€question€of€whether€the€appellants€or€appellee€should€be€allowed€to€adopt€the€twins.€Ð ä4 ÐThe€trial€court€found€that€the€appellee€should€be€given€custody€of€the€children€for€several€reasonsÐ Ð  Ðand€found€that€the€appellants€had€broken€the€terms€of€their€Child€Placement€Contracts€with€DCS.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThis€court€stayed€the€trial€courtððs€final€order€with€regard€to€the€transfer€of€custody.€Ð ”ä ÐTherefore,€the€twins€continue€to€reside€with€appellants€and€have€visitation€with€appellee.Ð €Ð ÐÌÓ  Óò òII.ó óÐ X ¨ ÐÓ~ÓÌà  àThis€court€must€review€this€case€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€of€the€trial€court€with€a€presumptionÐ 0"€  Ðof€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€isÐ #l! Ðotherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€When€a€court€is€determining€the€question€of€adoption,€theÐ $X" Ðcourtððs€focus€should€be€on€what€is€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child.€€òòSonet€v.€Unknown€Father€ofÐ ô$D # ÐJoseph€Daniel€Hastyóó,€797€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990);òò€In€re€Adoption€of€Hart,€óó709€S.W.2dÐ à%0!$ Ð582€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€And€where€the€interest€of€a€child€and€the€interest€of€an€adult€are€inÐ Ì&"% Ðconflict,€such€conflict€must€be€resolved€in€favor€of€the€child.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„101(d).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€appellee€should€have€custody€of€the€twins€for€several€reasons:Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐÒ°ÒÒ°Òà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€Robbie€Fulford€is€the€paternal€aunt€of€these€children€andÐ ° Ðâ âthe€adopted€parent€of€their€only€sibling.Ð œì Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€Robbie€Fulford€is€a€fit€person€to€have€the€custody€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðminor€children.Ð tÄ Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€Robbie€Fulford€is€physically,€mentally,€and€financiallyÐ `° Ðable€to€provide€for€the€children.Ð L œ Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€A.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.€are€suitable€children€for€adoption.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€the€adoption€by€Robbie€Fulford€is€in€the€best€interest€ofÐ $ t ÐA.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.Ð  ` Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€Robbie€Fulford€has€previously€adopted€the€older€sibling€ofÐ ü L  ÐA.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.,€and€that€the€law€prefers€relative€placement€with€RobbieÐ è 8  ÐFulford€in€order€to€keep€the€family€unit€together.Ð Ô$  Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€if€the€children€did€not€have€suitable€relatives€forÐ À  Ðplacement€and€adoption,€the€foster€parents€who€have€had€the€children€in€their€homeÐ ¬ü  Ðcertainly€should€be€given€preference€over€anybody€else€in€the€world;€but€between€theÐ ˜è  Ðfoster€parents€and€these€children€being€with€their€relatives,€they€need€to€be€with€theirÐ „Ô  Ðrelatives.Ð pÀ Ðà ` àThe€Court€finds€that€Collective€Exhibit€Number€3€in€items€eight€and€nine€ofÐ \¬ Ðthe€contract€the€foster€parents€signed€with€the€State€of€Tennessee,€Department€ofÐ H˜ ÐChildrenððs€Services,€provides€ð ðThat€weðð€ð!ð€thatððs€the€foster€parents€ð!ð€ð ðthat€we€will€notÐ 4„ Ðattempt€to€adopt,€file€a€petition€to€adopt,€or€take€any€steps€whatsoever€to€adopt€thisÐ  p Ðchild€unless€after€consultation€with€department€staff,€the€decision€is€made€thatÐ  \ Ðadoption€by€us€is€in€the€childððs€best€interest.ðð€€The€Court€finds€that€Donna€ElaineÐ øH ÐWilliams€and€Glendon€Todd€Williams€did€not€do€that.€€The€filing€of€their€adoptionÐ ä4 Ðpetition€was€contrary€to€what€they€agreed€to€do€with€the€department.Ð Ð  ÐÒ°µÒÒ°§ÒÌTherefore,€the€main€issues€in€this€caseòòóó€are€whether€the€preference€under€the€law€for€adoption€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðchildren€lies€with€the€foster€parents€or€family€members€in€this€situation€and€whether€the€evidenceÐ ”ä Ðpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€childrenððs€best€interests€would€be€served€byÐ €Ð Ðallowing€the€appellee€to€adopt€them.Ð l¼ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓIII.Ð D!” ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„1„115(g)(1)Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓµ(Óó óTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„1„115(g)(1)€reads€as€follows:Ð $X" ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°ÒWhen€a€child€is€placed€in€a€foster€home€by€the€department€or€otherwise,€and€becomesÐ à%0!$ Ðavailable€for€adoption€due€to€the€termination€or€surrender€of€all€parental€orÐ Ì&"% Ðguardianship€rights€to€the€child,€those€foster€parents€shall€be€given€first€preferenceÐ ¸'#& Ðto€adopt€the€child€if€the€child€has€resided€in€the€foster€home€for€twelve€(12)€or€moreÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconsecutive€months€immediately€preceding€the€filing€of€an€adoption€petition.Ð )à$( ÐÒ°‘)ÒÒ°ƒ)ÒÌÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àOn€appeal,€DCS€argues€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„1„115€does€not€create€aÐ ° Ðconclusive€presumption.€€DCS€cites€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€37„2„403(a)(1)€and€(d)€for€theÐ œì Ðproposition€that€there€is€a€preference€for€family€placement.€€It€is€true€that€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ ˆØ Ððð€37„2„403(a)(1)€and€(d)€create€a€preference€for€family€placement.€€However,€this€section€of€the€codeÐ tÄ Ðconcerns€foster€care€of€children,€as€opposed€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„1„115€whichÐ `° Ðconcerns€adoption.€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àWe€addressed€a€similar€argument€in€òòIn€re:€S.B.óó,€No.€M1999„00140„COA„R3„CV,€2000€WLÐ $ t Ð575934€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).€€We€specifically€stated€inòò€In€re:€S.B.óó€that€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ  ` Ððð€37„2„403(a)(1)€and€(d)€applied€to€ð ðplacement€immediately€after€removal€from€the€home.ðð€€òòIn€re:Ð ü L  ÐS.B.óó,€2000€WL€575934,€at€*4.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€the€twins€became€available€for€adoption€when€the€trial€court€terminated€theÐ À  Ðparental€rights€of€the€twinsðð€natural€parents.€€The€twins€had€lived€with€the€appellants€for€twelveÐ ¬ü  Ðmonths€before€they€filed€their€adoption€petition.€We€agree€that€the€preference€is€not€conclusive,€butÐ ˜è  Ðin€the€absence€of€evidence€requiring€a€different€result,€the€statutory€preference€would€prevail.€€UnderÐ „Ô  Ðthe€controlling€statute,€the€appellants€would€have€first€preference€to€adopt€the€children.Ð pÀ ÐÌÓ  Óò òIV.Ð H˜ ÐChild€Placement€Contractó óÐ 4„ ÐÓ[2ÓÌà  àWe€now€turn€to€the€provisions€of€the€contracts.€€The€trial€court€cites€the€provisions€of€theÐ  \ Ðcontracts€as€a€basis€for€the€granting€of€custody€to€the€appellee.€€Provision€9€of€the€contracts,€which€Ð øH Ðis€quoted€by€the€trial€court,€states€in€full:Ð ä4 ÐÌÒ°ÒÒ°ÒThat€we€will€not€attempt€to€adopt,€file€a€petition€to€adopt,€or€take€any€stepsÐ ¼  Ðwhatsoever€to€adopt€this€child,€unless,€after€consultation€with€Department€staff,€theÐ ¨ø Ðdecision€is€made€that€adoption€by€us€is€in€the€childððs€best€interest.€€òòIt€is€ourÐ ”ä Ðunderstanding,€however,€that€if€the€child€has€been€in€our€home€for€one€year€and€weÐ €Ð Ðmeet€the€qualifications€required€of€other€adoptive€parents,€that€we€will€be€given€firstÐ l¼ Ðpreference€for€adoption€of€this€child.óóÐ X ¨ ÐÒ° 4ÒÒ°ÿ3ÒÌ(Emphasis€added).€€The€trial€court€and€the€appelleeððs€brief€imply€that€the€appellants€did€not€followÐ 0"€  Ðthe€provisions€of€the€contracts€that€they€signed.€€However,€the€appellants€received€the€twins€on€AprilÐ #l! Ð19,€1999€and€received€notice€from€DCS€that€the€appellee€would€be€given€permanent€custody€of€theÐ $X" Ðtwins€on€April€19,€2000,€when€the€children€had€been€in€the€appellantsðð€home€for€one€year.€Ð ô$D # ÐAccording€to€the€provisions€of€the€contract,€at€that€point€the€appellants€should€be€given€preferenceÐ à%0!$ Ðfor€the€adoption€of€the€children.€€It€does€not€appear€therefore€that€the€appellants€broke€their€contractÐ Ì&"% Ðwith€DCS.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€appellants€did€indeed€follow€the€provisions€of€the€contracts,€therefore,€thisÐ )à$( Ðcannot€be€a€basis€for€denying€the€appellants€the€ability€to€adopt€the€children.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐÓ  Óò òV.Ð ° ÐBest€Interest€of€the€Childrenó óÐ œì ÐÓt:ÓÌà  àSince€there€is€not€a€preference€for€family€placement€under€the€Code€provisions€and€theÐ tÄ Ðcontracts,€ð ðthe€best€interest€of€the€child€is€the€paramount€consideration€in€an€adoption€proceeding.ðð€Ð `° ÐòòSonet€v.€Unknown€Father€of€Joseph€Daniel€Hastyóó,€797€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€€In€òòIn€re:Ð L œ ÐS.B.óó,€while€discussing€the€applicable€statute,€we€stated€that,€ð ð[w]e€find€nothing€in€this€statute€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðindicate€that€an€ongoing€placement€with€a€non„relative€that€is€otherwise€serving€the€childððs€bestÐ $ t Ðinterest€must€be€ended€if€a€family€member€later€seeks€to€adopt€the€child.ðð€€òòIn€re:€S.B.óó,€2000€WLÐ  ` Ð575934,€at€*4.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€twins€had€been€living€with€the€appellants€since€April€19,€1999.€€The€guardian€ad€litemððsÐ Ô$  Ðreport€filed€with€the€trial€court€stated€that€the€appellants€had€been€meeting€the€needs€of€the€twinsÐ À  Ðphysically,€mentally€and€emotionally.€€The€DCS€Quarterly€Report€from€April€25,€2000€also€statedÐ ¬ü  Ðthat€the€twins€were€very€good€babies€and€ð ðd[id]€not€have€any€behavioral€problems€and€theirÐ ˜è  Ðemotional€needs€are€being€met.ðð€€The€report€went€on€to€state,€ð ð[A.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.]€are€happy,Ð „Ô  Ðhealthy€babies.€€They€are€up€to€date€on€all€of€their€well€baby€check€ups€and€immunizations.ðð€€Clearly,Ð pÀ Ðthe€twins€have€been€well„cared€for€while€residing€with€the€appellants.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àIn€November€of€2000,€the€time€of€the€hearing,€the€appellants€were€both€in€their€mid„thirties.€Ð 4„ ÐMrs.€Williams€has€lupus,€but€at€the€time€of€the€hearing,€it€had€been€in€remission€for€five€years.€€TheyÐ  p Ðhad€been€foster€parents€for€a€total€of€nineteen€months€to€various€children€and€had€cared€for€fifteenÐ  \ Ðto€twenty€foster€children€over€the€course€of€that€time.€€Mr.€Williams€had€been€working€for€the€sameÐ øH Ðcompany€for€seventeen€years.€€The€familyððs€income€is€around€$55,000€a€year.€€The€appellants€alsoÐ ä4 Ðhave€family€in€the€area,€including€brothers€and€sisters,€aunts€and€uncles,€and€cousins.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€of€the€hearing,€Appellee€was€in€her€mid„to„late€fifties.€€She€had€adopted€theÐ ¨ø Ðtwinsðð€sibling,€M.T.R.F.,€on€June€10,€1998,€when€he€was€almost€seventeen€months€old.€€AppelleeÐ ”ä Ðdid€not€visit€with€the€twins€until€the€end€of€February€or€beginning€of€March€of€2000€according€to€herÐ €Ð Ðtestimony€at€the€hearing.€€Overnight€visits€with€the€twins€did€not€begin€until€late€April€of€2000.€€€AtÐ l¼ Ðthe€time€of€the€hearing,€appellee€lived€in€a€house€with€her€adopted€son,€her€natural€son,€and€her€twoÐ X ¨ Ðgrandchildren.€€She€did€not€work€due€to€a€previous€back€injury€in€1984.€€She€had€cancer€in€1991€andÐ D!” Ðneeded€Medicare,€and€she€was€then€approved€to€collect€Social€Security€disability.€€For€herself€andÐ 0"€  Ðher€adopted€son,€she€received€between€$1800€and€$1900€a€month€in€Social€Security€benefits,€at€theÐ #l! Ðtime€of€the€hearing.€€She€stated€that€if€she€was€allowed€to€adopt€the€twins,€she€would€receiveÐ $X" Ðadditional€payments€for€them€after€they€resided€with€her€for€a€year.€€She€owns€her€home€and€land€inÐ ô$D # ÐTennessee€and€owns€some€rental€property€in€Florida.€€As€for€relatives€in€the€area,€appelleeððs€motherÐ à%0!$ Ðand€an€aunt€and€uncle€live€in€the€area.€€She€has€a€sister€and€three€half„brothers€in€Florida,€one€of€theÐ Ì&"% Ðbrothers€being€the€father€of€M.T.R.F.,€A.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àIn€its€ruling,€the€trial€court€based€its€decision€on€giving€a€preference€to€relatives€in€anÐ )à$( Ðadoption€situation.€€The€trial€court€stated,€ð ðthe€law€with€regard€to€children€first€prefers€parents,€nextÐ |*Ì%) Ðrelatives,€kinfolks.€.€.€.€if€these€little€girls€didnððt€have€relatives€over€here,€then€these€folks,€the€fosterÐ h+¸&* Ðparents€who€have€had€these€children€in€their€home,€certainly€should€be€given€preference€overÐ ° Ðanybody€else€in€the€world.ðð€€The€trial€court,€therefore,€found€that€both€the€appellants€and€the€appelleeÐ œì Ðwould€make€adequate€parents€for€the€twins.€€The€deciding€factor€for€the€court€was€the€preference€forÐ ˆØ Ðrelatives.€€As€we€have€seen€in€the€applicable€statute,€there€is€not€a€preference€for€relatives€after€theÐ tÄ Ðchildren€have€been€in€foster€care€for€twelve€months.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€appellee€initially€refused€even€temporary€care€of€the€children€when€first€approached€byÐ 8 ˆ ÐDCS,€and€then€did€not€visit€them€for€eleven€months.€€She€stated€that€after€the€first€visit€in€March€ofÐ $ t Ð2000,€she€changed€her€mind€and€decided€she€wanted€to€adopt€the€twins.€€We€believe€it€would€beÐ  ` Ðadverse€to€the€best€interest€of€the€children€to€totally€uproot€them€from€the€home€and€care€that€theyÐ ü L  Ðhave€known€for€the€first€year€of€their€lives.€€When€DCS€made€its€decision€to€place€the€children€withÐ è 8  Ðthe€appellee€permanently,€the€children€had€not€even€spent€a€night€at€appelleeððs€house.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àWe€believe€that€in€this€particular€situation,€continuity€of€placement€is€the€most€importantÐ ¬ü  Ðfactor€when€determining€what€is€in€the€childrenððs€best€interest.€€The€children€have€lived€with€theÐ ˜è  Ðappellants€from€the€time€they€were€eighteen€days€old.€€Clearly,€the€children€would€have€forged€aÐ „Ô  Ðparent„child€bond€with€the€appellants€who€are€the€only€caretakers€the€children€have€even€known.€€Ð pÀ ÐThe€twins€refer€to€the€appellants€as€mommy€and€daddy.€€It€is€clear€that€the€guardian€ad€litem,€DCS,Ð \¬ Ðand€even€the€trial€court€have€found€the€appellants€caring€parents€to€the€twins.€€We€think€the€evidenceÐ H˜ Ðpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€adoption€by€the€appellee€would€be€in€the€bestÐ 4„ Ðinterest€of€the€children.Ð  p ÐÌà  àFor€these€reasons,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtððs€decision€should€be€reversed,€and€theÐ øH Ðappellantsðð€petition€for€adoption€of€A.K.S.R.€and€A.T.S.R.€should€be€granted.€€We€remand€the€causeÐ ä4 Ðto€the€Chancery€Court€of€Cheatham€County€for€any€further€proceedings€necessary.€€Tax€the€costs€onÐ Ð  Ðappeal€to€the€appellee,€Robbie€Ô_ÔFulfordÔ_Ô,€and€DCS€equally.Ð ¼  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________€Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.