ÿWPCò  }o–’.í»"?üWàû¹MĽN!Vbö˜qmc)¬)»‰/–®Ñé¼>Ò/™”~Ù  sÝ ­ (ʘÜÅ¿¯JfìCÜïøs<UNu~ õ¯àµÂ–¾±ÊWšŠš¾[ÕÂ,Õã·z™ªHZovwæ´ÿ69©VÃIøSÏ !†ÐÁs$‘~Ô_£¨`Rþø: ³Â—2æÉ:Æ_ðü!ÿšÐ^`BGÿZÞÚUB¢6+‰’:xuÉf,gdð·W×òBŸ6ãV+).¥¹¼>ãq‚7«¦2¹Õ¹½U° ß/°ÉosÊ;Ï}\%‹Èßý×Ý›på–Ð'Æ„!ÈÛ5^–û µ¿íÖØócAË3®ZåXqÁ&Î$ˆÈ²; 7¾+ƒÙIǴņ ¨;)A‚¿@•„$q¿{4âN Ót£öñÌ(ÎDØÊx>-ˆöAd‘cëY6Fœ‘GŒ#Ä ­Wâi(ÁCç¡\ˈ_Φþûæ¢îê…VMŽ“Æ4÷ÌVÅõH ËÕ‰`,súÆ‘OÍ)àšMQlZÒÓœ=l@¿rÛ€9¥¢šÔ )sñP{2Sak¬x ëqìµ¼¸*# LU:W %‘ 0(—b ¿w@Ë4 .6U:999999999999999999999 AQsÆÄ 0DŠ 0DÎ 0D  D/V B… B¢ D3¿ ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡- ù - ‚Dƒ„D…†D‡Dˆ‰Ó€“Ö…#%3|x“ ùÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ X›XXXÔÔ€ # X X›ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ X›X # ÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€14,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"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 dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ‰ñ›ñ‰ñÑ°ÑÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€›XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñò òÔ€¼æ@¼XXÔÓ  Óñ“ññ‰ñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô ` 8ttxP,ð  rßñ‰ññ“ññ“ññ“ññ“ññ‰ñ›ñ‰ññ“ññ“ñßt€ )>.*jxàÿ` `€€@EÔ` 8ttxP ?ð È tß›ñ“ñà@  êàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@¦¦(êàAT€NASHVILLEó óÔ€X›X¼¼æ@ԈР ÐÌÌÒ„ÒÌÌBAXTER€NEAL€HELSON,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð È À Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellant,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ”Œ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Ð zr  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9802„CH„00091Ð `X  ÐVS.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð F>  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àWilliamson€ChanceryÐ ,$  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€24911Ð   ÐLETICIA€FINLEY€CYRUS,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àÐ øð  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àDefendant/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)Рļ ÐÌÌà@š š žàAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€WILLIAMSON€COUNTYˆÌà@zz%žàAT€FRANKLIN,€TENNESSEEˆÌÌà@Å Å žàTHE€HONORABLE€HENRY€DENMARK€BELL,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌÌÌÌCHARLES€G.€œBLACKARD›,€IIIÌ155€Franklin€Road,€Suite€155ÌœBrentwood›,€Tennessee€37027Ìà Ø àAttorney€for€Plaintiff/AppellantÌÌJ.€RUSSELL€œHELDMAN›Ì320€Main€Street,€Suite€101ÌFranklin,€Tennessee€37064Ìà Ø àAttorney€for€Defendant/AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ÔÔžàAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€IN€PART;ˆÌà@ss*žàAND€REMANDEDˆÌÌÌÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌTODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌCAIN,€J.ÌÌÌÌÌÒ„ÒÓÓò òÔ€„œ„XX›Ôòòà@tt(êàO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÔ€X›X„„œÔˆÐ €;x4:¿ Їà Ø àà 0 àThe€issues€in€this€appeal€involve€the€lower€courtððs€order€incorporatingÏ(1)€a€provision€that€a€œnine„year„old›€child€did€not€have€to€visit€with€his€father€against€hisÏ(the€childððs)€wishes€and€(2)€a€provision€that€the€mother€was€to€arrange€a€private€phoneÏcall€between€the€child€and€his€father€once€a€œweek.€€We€reverse€the€order€with€respectÏto€visitation.€€Otherwise€we€affirm.›ÌÌà@²²-êàò òI.ó óˆÐ ÐÈ  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€Circuit€Court€of€Boyd€County,€Kentucky€entered€an€agreed€order€onÏMay€22,€1992€granting€primary€custody€of€a€minor€child€to€the€œmother,›€and€settingÏspecific€times€for€the€fatherððs€visitation.€œSubsequent›€orders€made€some€minorÏalterations,€primarily€with€respect€to€visitation€during€summer€vacations.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€mother€moved€to€Williamson€County€and€later€remarried.€€TheÏfather€also€moved€to€œthe€Nashville€area.›€€On€August€28,€1997€the€father€filed€a€petitionÏin€the€Williamson€County€Chancery€Court€to€enforce€the€Kentucky€orders€and€to€setÏspecific€times€for€visitation.€€The€mother€filed€a€motion€for€an€order€that€there€be€noÏforced€visitation€between€the€father€and€œchild,›€and€that€the€father€be€enjoined€fromÏmaking€derogatory€statements€about€the€mother,€or€the€motherððs€œfamily,›€in€theÏpresence€of€the€child.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àAfter€a€œhearing,›€the€chancellor€entered€an€order€œadopting€andÏdomesticating€the€orders€from€Boyd€County,€Kentucky.€€The€order€resulted€in€what€theÏlower€court€termed,€ð ðstandard€every€other€weekend€visitation€and€such€visitation€is€notÏto€be€supervised.ðð›Ìœà Ø àà 0 àOn€the€motherððs€motion€that€the€child€not€be€forced€to€visit€with€hisÌ€father,€the€court€ordered€the€following:›à  àÐ Ì5Ä.4 ÐÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ àà à àœÌ›à ˆ à6.à à àDefendantððs€motion€for€an€order€of€no€forced€orÐ ~8v17 Ðcoerced€visitation€is€œgranted.€›€Plaintiffððs€visitation€or€visitationÏprivileges€with€the€minor€child€shall€not€be€coerced€or€forcedÐ J:B39 Ðby€anyone€against€the€minor€childððs€wishes,€and€the€minorÏchild€shall€not€be€required,€to€visit€with€Plaintiff€against€theÏminor€childððs€wishes.ÌÌà ˆ à7.à à àDefendant€shall€tell€the€minor€child€that€he€is€notÐ H@  Ðto€be€forced€to€go€on€visitation€with€Plaintiff,€that€if€he€doesÏnot€want€to€go€on€visitation,€he€does€not€go,€and€that€he€doesÏnot€have€to€go€on€visitation€unless€he€decides€he€wants€to€go.ÌÌà ˆ à8.à à àDefendant€shall€arrange€for€the€minor€child€toÐ øð Ðmake€a€weekly€telephone€call€to€Plaintiff€in€a€location€whereÏno€one€is€hearing€what€the€conversation€is€on€the€calling€side,Ïsaid€weekly€telephone€call€to€occur€approximately€at€7:00Ïp.m.€each€Sunday€evening.ÌÌà ˆ àà à àà 8 à*à  à*à è à*Ð ˜ ÐÌà ˆ à11.à à àDefendantððs€motion€for€an€order€requiringÐ xp Ðvisitation€to€be€supervised€is€denied€at€this€time;€andÏDefendantððs€motion€for€an€injunction€against€Plaintiff€fromÏmaking€derogatory€statements€is€hereby€granted€and€is€madeÏreciprocal€against€both€parties€and€therefore€Plaintiff€andÏDefendant€each€are€hereby€enjoined€and€restrained€fromÏmaking€derogatory€statements€about€the€other€or€membersÏof€the€otherððs€family,€including€grandparents,€in€the€presenceÏof€the€minor€child.ÌÌÌÌññœññÒ€0 Òññœññà@((+(àœò òñ€ñˆà  àñ€ñII.ó ó›Ð ¸)°"% ÐÌÌÌÒ„ÒÓÓà Ø àà 0 àThe€lower€courtððs€order€was€based€on€the€testimony€of€the€childððsÏmother,€his€grandmother,€and€a€treating€psychiatrist.€€œAll›€of€the€witnesses€testified€œthatÏthe›€child€did€not€wish€to€ever€visit€his€father€again€or€even€to€talk€to€him€on€theÏtelephone.€€The€animosity,€according€to€the€witnesses,€grew€out€of€the€fatherððs€actsÏin€(1)€cutting€the€childððs€hair€when€he€visited€with€the€father€and€(2)€persisting€in€œcalling›Ïthe€child€Neal€when€he€preferred€being€called€ð ðTrace.ððÌÐ ¸8°15 Ðà Ø àà 0 àAlthough€the€mother€has€custody,€the€child€actually€lives€with€hisÏgrandmother€and€a€œtenññ„ñññ‚ñ›€ñ‚ñyearñƒñ„ñƒññ„ñ›€ñ„ñold›€half€œsister,›€in€a€house€close€ñ€ñœñ€ñœto›€where€the€mother€andÏstepfather€live€with€their€two€smaller€children.€€The€mother€and€grandmother€testifiedÏthat€when€the€child€went€off€with€the€father€he€did€so€reluctantly,€and€when€he€cameÏhome€he€would€be€upset€and€agitated.€€He€begged€not€to€be€made€to€go€with€hisÏfather€or€to€talk€to€him€on€the€telephone.€€From€the€time€he€was€three,€he€had€oftenÏbegged€to€be€able€to€talk€to€someone,€a€judge€or€the€police,€so€that€he€would€not€haveÏto€visit€his€father.€€He€hated€the€haircuts€given€him€by€his€father€and€he€wished€to€beÏcalled€Trace.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€psychiatrist€who€had€been€treating€the€child€since€1994€testified€thatÏthe€child€had€an€attention€deficit€œand€anxiety€disorder€and›€was€œhyperactiveñ€ñ›ñ€ñ.€›€œThe›Ïattention€deficit€disorder€was€being€treated€with€œthe›€drug€ñ€ñœñ€ñœRitalin›.€€The€anxiety€disorderÏconcerned€a€fear€of€being€separated€from€his€grandmother.€€He€œalso€had›€a€longÏstanding€fear€of€getting€his€hair€cut.€€The€psychiatrist€œhad›€written€a€letter€to€theÏmotherððs€lawyer€stating€the€childððs€fears€in€this€œregard.€€The€psychiatrist€testified,Ïhowever,€that›€the€child€had€never€voiced€a€determination€not€to€visit€with€his€fatherÏagain€until€he€returned€from€the€summer€visitation€in€August€of€1997.€€When€asked€ifÏshe€had€an€opinion€on€whether€the€child€should€be€forced€to€visit€with€his€father,€theÏpsychiatrist€said,€ð ðI€think€to€force€it€when€a€child€is€this€opposed€would€be€reallyÏanxiety„provoking€and€very€difficult€for€him.€€œSo›€I€donððt€think€it€should€be€forced.ððÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€fatherððs€testimony€gave€an€entirely€different€picture.€€He€testified€thatÏthe€haircuts€he€had€given€the€child€were€with€œthe€childððs›€consent€and€that€the€onlyÏobjection€to€the€use€of€the€name€ð ðNealðð€came€from€the€childððs€grandmother.ÌÌœñ€ñò òó óñ€ñ›à Ø àà 0 àThe€chancellor€made€œonly›€a€few€findings€of€fact.€€At€the€end€of€theÏhearing€he€discussed€the€proof€with€the€lawyers:Ð ¨9 26 ÐÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ à[THE€COURT]:€At€the€same€time,€I€think€weððve€got€aÏchild€who€is€in€a€predicament€where€to€force€him€probablyÏwould€make€the€relationship,€the€possibility€of€a€relationshipÏworse€rather€than€better,€and€thatððs€the€sense€I€get€from€whatÏthe€psychiatrist€testified€to.€€And€I€think€there€was€somethingÏin€there€about€„„€I€donððt€remember€anything€about€himÏdrinking€or€anything€that€would€suggest€fear.ÌÌà ˆ àœà à àà 8 à*à  à*à è à*›Ð ˆ€ ÐÌà ˆ àœWell,›€the€psychiatrist€was€watching€the€child€and€tryingÏto€give€a€full€report,€I€think.€€And€it€boils€down€to€the€fact€thatÏwhat€was€truly€significant€to€the€child€was€a€damn€haircut.ÌÌà ˆ àà à àà 8 à*à  à*à è à*Ð (  ÐÌà ˆ àBut€the€way€it€is,€thatððs€apparently€a€big€thing€to€theÏchild€and€I€donððt€know€anything€to€do€about€that€except€I€thinkÏhis€credibility€„„€he€got€the€haircuts,€as€the€child€says€and€theÏmaternal€side€has€testified,€I€think,€he€got€the€haircuts.€€œAnd›ÏI€think€that€was€so€out€of€proportion€to€the€significance€that€itÏshould€have,€but€as€the€psychiatrist€says,€whatever€you€thinkÏor€I€think,€to€him€itððs€of€vital€importance.ÌÌà ˆ àAnd€as€Iððm€getting€the€sense€of€it,€that€and€the€nameÏð ðTraceðð€have€been€a€bee€in€the€childððs€bonnet€that€have€keptÏhim€from€having€as€good€a€relationship€as€he€should.ÌÌà ˆ àà à àà 8 à*à  à*à è à*Ð H!@ ÐÌà ˆ àI€wouldnððt€make€a€finding,€as€I€said,€I€have€a€profoundÏsuspicion€and€have€had€those€profound€suspicions€before,Ïand€all€I€can€say€is€that€I€believe€that€if€the€grandmother€hasÏintentionally€tried€to€destroy€or€harm€the€possibilities€of€aÏgood€relationship,€I€firmly€believe€there€is€an€especially€hotÏplace€in€hell€waiting€for€her.€€Thatððs€all.€€Iððm€just€a€Judge.€€œAnd›ÏI€donððt€think€„„€and€on€that€I€think€my€judgment€is€just€as€goodÏas€the€psychiatrist.€€And€to€have€this€child€come€in€and€sayÏthat,€whether€he€is€programmed€or€not,€itððs€a€fact€of€life€thatÏhe€would€say€that€he€doesnððt€want€to€be€forced.ÌÌà ˆ àSo,€the€visitation€will,€I€guess,€need€to€be€amendedÏonly€„„€I€think€it€certainly€canððt€be€increased.€€I€think€theÏvisitation€schedule€should€be€as€it€is,€at€this€home,€whereverÏit€may€be,€and€I€donððt€think€it€needs€to€be€supervised.€€On€theÏother€hand,€the€motion€that€it€not€be€forced,€I€think€that€has€toÏbe€sustained.ÌÌà ˆ àMR.€œHELDMAN›:€Thank€you,€Your€Honor.ÌÌà ˆ àTHE€COURT:€Thereððs€no€way€I€can€fix€it,€except€thatÏI€think€there€needs€to€be€something€that€puts€the€burden,€thatÏthere€be€some€required€contact.€€Visitation,€canððt€make€himÏgo.€€If€he€says€he€doesnððt€want€to€go,€he€doesnððt€go.€€I€thinkÏthe€child€should€be€told€that,€that€he€is€not€to€be€forced,€andÐ ¨9 26 Ðthat€he€doesnððt€have€to€go€until€he€wants€to.€€And€heððs€goingÏto€have€to€decide€whether€he€wants€a€relationship€or€not.ÌÌñ„ñœñ„ñà ˆ àBut€I€think€there€ought€to€be€an€order€„„€I€donððt€knowÏwhat€„„€this€lady€is€not€a€party€to€this€proceeding.€€I€canððt€orderÏher€to€do€anything,€except€sheððs€there.€€But€I€can€order€thisÏlady€because€she€is€the€mother€of€the€child,€and€so€the€orderÏwill€be€on€her€to€make€arrangements€for€the€child€to€makeÏweekly€telephone€calls€to€the€father€with€no€one€hearing€whatÏthe€conversation€is€on€the€calling€side.ÌÌÌÌÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÓÓœThe€chancellor€did›€not€find€œthat›€visitation€with€the€father€would€be€detrimental€to€theÏchild€or€that€it€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests€to€have€the€fatherððs€visitationÏterminated.€€In€fact,€the€visitation€orders€are€still€in€effect.€€So,€the€fatherððs€visitationÏwith€the€child€will€be€determined€solely€by€the€childððs€wishes.ÌÌà@zz,êàœò òIII.ó ó›ˆÐ ˜ ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€this€case,€one€of€an€increasing€number€involving€coercive€visitationÏorders,€we€start€by€recognizing€a€general€rule:€that€ððthe€details€of€custody€andÏvisitation€with€children€are€peculiarly€within€the€broad€discretion€of€the€trial€judge.ðð€ÏòòœSuttles›€v.€œSuttles›óó,€748€S.W.2d€427€at€429€(Tenn.€1988).€€òòSee€also€Edwards€v.Ð ø%ð! ÐEdwardsóó,€501€S.W.2d€283€(Tenn.€App.€1973).€€We€have€no€problem€with€the€trialÐ Ø'Ð # Ðjudge€terminating€visitation€privileges€altogether€on€a€finding€that€such€visits€wouldÏresult€in€harm€to€the€child€ð ðin€either€a€physical€or€moral€sense.ðð€€òòSee€œSuttles›óó€at€429.€Ð ˜+$' ÐWe€are€also€told€that€visitation€can€be€denied€to€a€non„custodial€parent€when€it€wouldÏresult€in€severe€emotional€harm.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ36„6„301€(Acts€1995,€ch.Ð X/P(+ Ð428,€ðð€3).›€€But€absent€such€findings,€the€public€policy€of€this€œstate€is›€that€the€courtÏòòshallóó€ð ðgrant€such€rights€of€visitation€as€will€enable€the€child€and€the€non„custodialÐ 3,/ Ðparent€to€maintain€a€parent„child€relationship.ðð€€òòId.€€See€œPizzillo›€v.€œPizzillo›óó,€884€S.W.2dÐ ø4ð-1 Ð749€(Tenn.€App.€œ1994).›ÌÐ ¸8°15 Ðà Ø àà 0 àThe€chancellor€recognized€these€principles€when€he€entered€theÏvisitation€orders€from€the€Kentucky€court.€€As€the€record€now€stands€the€father€has€theÏright€to€have€the€child€with€him€a€certain€number€of€days€each€month,€for€a€time€in€theÏsummer,€and€on€certain€holidays.€€œThe›€number€and€length€of€the€visitation€periods€onÏthe€face€of€the€order€are€not€an€issue€on€appeal.€€The€chancellor€did€not€find€that€theÏexercise€of€the€œcourt„ordered›€visitation€would€harm€the€child€in€any€way,€physically,Ïmorally,€or€emotionally€„„€even€though€the€psychiatrist€offered€some€limited€testimonyÏconcerning€the€childððs€emotional€state.€€We€do€not€think€that€the€psychiatristððs€opinionÏthat€forced€visitation€would€provoke€anxiety€in€the€child€and€would€be€ð ðvery€difficult€forÏhimðð€rises€to€the€level€of€the€œsevere€emotional›€harm€described€in€the€statute.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€come€back€to€the€conclusion€that€the€visitation€in€this€case€is€basedÏentirely€on€the€childððs€œwishes,›€and€we€conclude€that€allowing€a€nine„year„old€boy€toÏdecide€whether€his€father€can€exercise€his€court„ordered€visitation€is€not€an€exerciseÏof€the€chancellorððs€discretion.€€Rather,€it€œleaves›€the€question€to€the€discretion€of€theÏchild.€€As€we€have€recently€held,€the€childððs€preference€œis›€only€one€factor€to€beÏconsidered€in€deciding€which€parent€gets€òòcustodyóó€of€the€child.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð %  Ððð€36„6„106.€€ð ðIt€simply€canððt€be€the€only€factor€to€consider€in€deciding€visitationÏprivileges.ðð€€òòWilson€v.€Wilsonóó,€No.€01„A„01„9707„CV„00325€(Nashville,€Sept.€2,€1998),Ð È(À!$ Ðslip€op.€*18.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€are€aware€of€at€least€two€opinions€of€this€court€with€which€ourÏholding€in€this€case€seems€to€conflict.€€And€we€fear€that€those€cases€are€beingÏinterpreted€as€a€mandate€to€the€trial€courts€to€refrain€from€ordering€a€child€to€visit€withÏthe€non„custodial€parent€against€the€childððs€wishes.€€We€think€that€is€an€erroneousÏinterpretation€of€both€cases.Ìâ âÐ È7À04 Ðà Ø àà 0 àPerhaps€the€leading€case€is€òòJones€v.€Jonesóó,€No.€01„A„01„9607„CV„Ð  Ðâ â00346€(Nashville,€Feb.€26,€1997)€in€which€the€trial€judge€had€ordered€ð ðmeaningfulÏvisitationðð€with€the€non„custodial€parents€(the€mother€had€custody€of€the€two€youngerÏchildren;€the€father€custody€of€the€two€older€ones).€€œThe›€court€went€further€to€orderÏthat€if€a€child€refused€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€orders,€an€unruly€child€petition€wouldÏbe€filed€against€the€child€in€the€juvenile€court.€€On€appeal€this€court€said:ÌÓÓà8 Ø àà80 Ø ü!Ø ü!àà ˆ àCustody€and€visitation€issues€touch€the€homes,Ïhearths,€and€hearts€of€emotionally€vulnerable€children€andÏadults.€€The€sensitive€circumstances€of€a€family€brokenÏapart€by€divorce€require€restraint€and€understandingÏrather€than€heavy€handed,€authoritarian€intervention.€ÏœThus,›€custody€and€visitation€orders€should€reflect€theÏrealities€of€all€family€members€and€should€promoteÏconduct€that€is€reasonable€in€light€of€all€theÏcircumstances.€€œThey›€should€be€detailed€enough€toÏenable€the€parties€to€understand€precisely€what€the€courtÏexpects€of€them€and€what€the€consequences€of€theirÏfailure€to€abide€by€the€courtððs€order€will€be.Ð 0 ¤0 ¤ ÐÌà8 Ø àà80 Ø ü!Ø ü!àà ˆ àMeaningfulness€is€a€vague€and€subjective€concept.€ÏVisitation€that€might€be€considered€meaningful€by€someÏmight€not€be€considered€meaningful€by€others.€€NoÏconsistently€reliable€basis€exists€for€determining€whetherÏa€particular€visit€was€meaningful€or€not.€€Accordingly,Ïmeaningfulness€does€not€provide€a€workable€standard€forÏvisitation€arrangements€because€it€fails€to€inform€theÏparties€of€the€precise€conduct€expected€of€them.Ð 0 ¤0 ¤ ÐÌà8 Ø àà80 Ø ü!Ø ü!àà ˆ àThere€are€also€practical€limits€on€a€courtððs€ability€toÏrestore€the€bonds€of€trust€and€affection€in€dysfunctionalÏfamilies.€€Most€courts€do€not€have€the€resources€orÏexpertise€for€this€type€of€sustained€intervention.€€œCoerced›Ïvisitation€is€rarely€meaningful€and€usually€drives€familyÏmembers€farther€apart.€€Accordingly,€courts€should€avoidÏattempting€to€force€meaningful€relationships€upon€parentsÏand€children€who€have€been€alienated€from€each.Ð 0 ¤0 ¤ ÐÌà8 Ø àà80 Ø ü!Ø ü!àà ˆ àThe€trial€court€went€too€far€when€it€ordered€theÏchildren€to€have€ð ðmeaningful€œvisitationñ„ñ›ñ„ñðð›€and€when€itÏrequired€the€parents€to€coerce€the€children€to€comply€withÏthe€visitation€schedule.€€Accordingly,€we€modify€the€trialÏcourtððs€visitation€and€custody€decrees€by€deleting€both€theÏrequirement€that€visitation€be€ð ðmeaningfulðð€and€theÏparentsðð€obligation€to€commence€unruly€child€proceedingsÏif€the€children€do€not€cooperate€with€visitation.€€Since€theÏpartiesðð€oldest€child€has€now€reached€the€age€of€majority,Ïthe€partiesðð€only€remaining€obligations€are€to€refrain€fromÏdisparaging€each€other€in€the€presence€of€their€childrenÏand€to€cooperate€with€their€respective€efforts€to€haveÐ ¨9 26 Ðvisitation€in€the€manner€prescribed€by€the€trial€court.€€TheÏparents€should€not€be€required€to€force€their€children€toÏengage€in€visitation€against€their€wishes.Ð 0 ¤0 ¤ ÐÌÌÌÓÓà Ø àà 0 àœThe›€general€impression€that€trial€judges€canððt€order€children€to€visit€theirÏnon„custodial€parents€is€œprobably€based›€on€the€last€sentence€of€the€quotedÏœparagraphs.›€€But€the€opinion€should€be€read€in€context.€€œThe›€children€involved€inÏœòòJonesóó€were›€at€or€near€the€age€of€majority,€and€they€had€lived€in€the€same€householdÐ H@  Ðwith€their€mother€until€two€years€earlier.€€There€was,€consequently,€no€suspicion€thatÏthe€custodial€parent€had€deliberately€alienated€the€children€from€their€mother.€€UnderÏsuch€circumstances€this€court€was€reluctant€to€venture€out€on€a€course€that€mightÏmake€things€worse.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€this€case,€the€child€has€lived€virtually€all€his€life€apart€from€his€father.€ÏHe€is€now€nine.€€Although€it€is€clear€that€he€has€expressed€a€wish€not€to€visit€hisÏfather,€we€cannot€accept€the€conclusion€that€the€court€has€no€power€to€render€aid€toÏthe€father€in€furtherance€of€the€statutory€œmandate€to€promote€the€parent„childÏrelationship.›ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€addition,€after€we€reversed€the€more€radical€provisions€in€òòJonesóó,€theÐ È(À!$ Ðparties€still€had€an€obligation€ð ðto€cooperate€with€their€respective€efforts€to€haveÏvisitation€in€the€manner€prescribed€by€the€trial€courts.ðð€€Slip€op.€5.€€In€this€case€theÏchancellor€allowed€the€mother€to€tell€the€child€that€he€did€not€have€to€go€with€his€fatherÏagainst€his€wishes.€€We€think€this€is€a€guarantee€that€the€child€will€never€visit€with€theÏfather€as€long€as€the€child€is€under€the€custody€and€control€of€the€mother€andÏgrandmother.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àAnother€case€involving€forced€visitation€is€òòCollins€v.€Collinsóó,€No.€01„A„01„Ð È7À04 Ð9211„CV„00459€(Nashville,€May€26,€1993),€where€this€court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððsÐ ¨9 26 Ðrefusal€to€force€a€fourteen„year„old€daughter€to€visit€with€her€mother.€€The€childððsÏobjections€were€based€on€her€strong€religious€feelings€that€her€motherððs€homosexualÏlifestyle€was€improper.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€trial€court€in€that€case,€however,€found€that€forced€visitation€wouldÏbe€detrimental€to€the€child/parent€relationship.€€The€court€also€found€that€theÏrelationship€should€be€encouraged€by€unmonitored€telephone€privileges€and€anÏadmonition€to€the€father€not€to€take€any€action€that€would€alienate€the€child€from€theÏmother.€€We€do€not€think€òòCollins€v.€Collinsóó€is€authority€for€the€action€taken€by€the€trialÐ  Ðjudge€in€this€case.ÌÌà@oo-êàœò òñ…ñIñ…ñVñ†ñIñ†ñ.ó ó›ˆÐ ¨  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€reverse€the€portion€of€the€chancellorððs€order€holding€that€the€childÏdoes€not€have€to€visit€with€his€father€and€that€the€mother€should€instruct€the€child€thatÏhe€does€not€have€to€visit€his€father€if€he€doesnððt€wish€it.€€Without€a€finding€that€theÏvisits€would€harm€the€child,€such€an€order€is€contrary€to€the€public€policy€of€this€stateÏas€expressed€in€our€Code€and€the€cases€interpreting€it.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€œshould›€add,€however,€that€enforcing€the€visitation€orders€is€anotherÏproblem.€€As€we€said€in€òòJonesóó,€we€think€that€threatening€the€parents€with€contempt€orÐ ˆ,€%( Ðthe€child€with€delinquency€proceedings€is€rarely€effective€and€frequently€counter„¼productive.€€As€long€as€the€custodial€parent€is€neutral€toward€the€visitation€and€refrainsÏfrom€taking€any€action€to€alienate€the€child€from€the€other€parent,€the€burden€is€on€theÏnon„custodial€parent€to€establish€the€mutual€trust€and€confidence€that€must€be€theÏbasis€for€a€meaningful€relationship.€€We€cannot€believe€that€a€loving€parent€wouldÏinsist€on€making€his€child€miserable.ÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðà Ø àà 0 àœThe›€childððs€separation€anxiety€in€this€case€œmay€be›€triggered€by€theÏlength€of€the€visitation€periods.€€œWhen›€the€parties€were€living€so€far€apart,€a€visit€ofÏsome€days€œand€nights€was›€probably€the€only€practical€œsolution.€€But›€with€the€partiesÏliving€within€a€short€drive€of€each€other,€a€more€creative€plan€involving€short„term€visitsÏat€the€beginning€might€mitigate€the€anxiety.€€If€the€child€knew€that€he€would€return€toÏhis€home€at€night€and€that€his€father€wouldnððt€cut€his€hair,€his€feeling€of€security€wouldÏsurely€improve.€€On€remand€the€trial€court€is€free€to€examine€œall›€possibilities.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€would€make€one€more€observation€about€the€childððs€hair.€€The€styleÏand€length€of€the€hair€of€a€child€of€this€age€is€ordinarily€a€choice€for€the€custodialÏparent.€€The€father€should€respect€the€joint€decision€of€the€mother€and€the€child.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWith€respect€to€the€childððs€name,€we€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€fatherÏmay€use€the€childððs€given€name€when€referring€to€him.€€The€fatherððs€wishes€shouldÏcommand€the€same€respect€that€any€parent€is€due€on€such€a€personal€choice.€€ToÏgive€the€child€a€veto€power€on€this€issue€sets€a€bad€example€for€the€child.€€We€wouldÏœalso€add›€that€the€father€should€respect€the€childððs€wishes€with€respect€to€the€name€heÏwishes€to€be€called€in€his€other€personal€relationships.€€Therefore,€the€father€shouldÏnot€threaten€to€contact€the€childððs€school€or€other€third€parties€to€insist€that€they€useÏthe€childððs€given€name.ÌÌà0 Ø àà € àà@‹‹-êØ T$Ø T$àœò òVñ‡ñIIñ‡ñ.ó ó›ˆÐ h.`'* ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€mother€has€appealed€the€lower€courtððs€order€on€the€telephoneÏconversations€between€the€father€and€child.€€ñ†ñœñ†ñœAs›€indicated€in€the€foregoing€portions€ofÏthis€opinion€we€find€the€motherððs€position€on€this€issue€to€be€without€merit.Ìâ âÐ È7À04 Ðà Ø àà 0 àThe€lower€courtððs€order€is€reversed€as€indicated€in€this€opinion.€€In€allÏâ âother€respects€it€is€affirmed.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Chancery€Court€ofÏWilliamson€County€for€further€proceedings.€€Tax€the€costs€on€appeal€equally€to€theÏparties.ÌÌÌÓÓà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à_______________________________à  # àÐ H@  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ à€€€à à àà 8 àà  àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÐ 80  ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌMIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEÌÐ  (#  ÐÑ  ÑÔ€¼G°¼XXY Ôò òà@êê.êàœñˆñIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@™™(êàAT€NASHVILLEñˆñó óñˆñÔ€XY X¼¼G°ÔˆÐ  ÐÌÌÌÌBAXTER€NEAL€HELSON,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ô ì Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellant,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ÔÌ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Рļ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9802„CH„00091Ð ´¬  ÐVS.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ¤œ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àWilliamson€ChanceryÐ ”Œ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€24911Ð „|  ÐLETICIA€FINLEY€CYRUS,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àÐ tl  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAffirmed€in€Part;€ReversedÐ d\ Ðà Ø àDefendant/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)à è àin€Part;€and€RemandedÐ TL Ðñˆññ‡ñœñ‡ññˆñÌÔ€¼G°¼XXY Ôò òòòà@uu'êàJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€Tóóó óˆÐ 4, Ðñˆññ‡ñœñ‡ññˆñÌÔ€XY X¼¼G°ÔÓÓà Ø àà 0 àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€theÐ `X ÐChancery€Court€of€Williamson€County,€briefs€and€argument€of€counsel;€uponÏconsideration€whereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€œthe›€decree€of€the€ChancellorÏœshould€be€reversed€as€to€the€child€not€having€to€visit€his€father.€€In€all›€other€respectsÏthe€decree€is€affirmed.Ìà Ø àà 0 àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€of€the€Court€filed€herein,€it€is,€therefore,Ïordered€and€decreed€by€this€Court€that€the€decree€is€affirmed€in€part€and€reversed€inÏpart.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Chancery€Court€of€Williamson€County€for€œfurtherÏproceedings›€and€for€the€collection€of€the€costs€accrued€below.Ìà Ø àà 0 àCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€equally€against€Baxter€Neal€Helson€andÏœLeticia›€F.€Cyrus.ÌÌÓÓà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àMIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEÌñˆñ›