ÿWPCè0 ù} >m¥? ò>N€Vÿ¡‰Uª³3˜W™Pd[§¦„+†ÀQ’uWš~4<=ª§¿ïã…×u…2¦Íy“ræÇŒÖ³ ÞdX¸,c]Kܰd©ÜØLMŒ&IitÕ~|įq² +f„Þ‚X†?w1êxcí·}lrÙÁGPw *ZF,?‚MÙ¿-j6ªy›Qºfx~'/;KIL™+Zk·°· !ÁÃWä’Zf–Òšß9p;«FÝÖ5ë`šQjü¥ͧQ3wä¨I4ãå)jß™}uu©â®À1ó8§Qšö‰?»O¼ÈNàòD1BâÓË809áð}¼¤©Î «°.çnC€_9¤•Ðçh^wb0°>·UM‘MC0®7ÒéâÆâ¥Ã`‰CÁ7G‡Š)U2LÕóýÔÌ|@ìT&šE>-Úð©Ë™Äö%Í«8øý( ¬øÄÝ9>qÀ}†ù@Ç!ï¾µP¼/øËöQœ;ÝîÐ×ù',í gο¦[Ùlo'ØñêS_3‹äEýFm­e¼¤äî°Q¹ß™*zîŠmETŽã TH®\+bç `ô¯s{NÿK݃ϲ·O˧¿4£Àu®›b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz Å‘ ÆV ÆÆâƨ 0 DnN²D´»øE³`µoé„ måw â\"„>$.Â%mð'ð'ð'ð'ð'ð'ð'€]*]*]*]*bÝ+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+Ý+ 0 ëå+å+å+å+ BÐ,Ð, 0¤í, D3‘- D-Ä- 0Kñ-ñ- AS<.Æ. 0¤U/ 0Dù/ A«=0˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»tE+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularj5+am Files´E ˜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|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ »Ý ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMs.€Ray€alleged€in€her€complaint€that€four€children€were€born€of€the€marriage.€€She€corrected€this€misstatementÐ ° Ðin€an€amended€petition€filed€on€May€7,€1999,€when€she€alleged€that€Mr.€Ray€was€not€the€father€of€the€twins€and,Ð tÄ Ðtherefore,€that€they€should€be€placed€in€her€custody.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó :Ý ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMs.€Ray€has€not€appealed€either€the€custody€or€the€visitation€decisions,€and€Mr.€Staggs€has€not€taken€issue€withÐ ° Ðthe€$9,906€judgment€against€him€for€back€child€support. ±Ý ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAdoptive€parents€have€the€same€interests€as€biological€parents.€€òòSimmons€v.€Simmonsóó,€900€S.W.2d€682,€684Ð ° Ð(Tenn.€1995).€€Accordingly,€the€references€to€biological€parents€in€this€opinion€are€not€intended€to€imply€that€adoptiveÐ tÄ Ðparents€do€not€have€similar€rights. TONYAPETRECESolomanCantrell P.J.M.S.andStaggsLawrenceburgcaregiverStagg t]heStubblefieldFjelstadTroxelSantoskySundquistMcCloudnonmaritalPetrosky NaleGaskillEasonMabryDunavantODanielC.W.W.DeptServsDefriece ToofC.D.B.L.S.W.T.L.P.EldridgeAdelspergerGorskiRagainsRichlandf]atherCihlarhad hadfianc)eminimis eÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€necessity€of€finding€parental€unfitness€distinguishes€custody€disputes€between€biological€parents€and€thirdÐ ° Ðparties€from€custody€disputes€between€biological€parents.€€The€comparative€fitness€analysis€used€to€resolve€custodyÐ tÄ Ðdisputes€between€biological€parents€does€not€require€a€finding€of€parental€unfitness.€€òòGaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€626,Ð 8ˆ Ð631€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€In€contrast,€a€court€cannot€favor€a€third€party€over€a€biological€parent€unless€the€court€hasÐ üL Ðdetermined€that€the€biological€parent€is€unfit.€€òòIn€re€Adoption€of€a€Female€Childóó,€896€S.W.2d€546,€547„48€(Tenn.€1995);Ð À ÐòòHawk€v.€Hawkóó,€855€S.W.2d€at€581. ßÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€court€has€observed€that€a€finding€of€substantial€harm€to€a€child€includes€ð ða€finding€of€parental€unfitnessÐ ° Ðor€of€dependency€and€neglect€of€the€child€.€.€..ðð€€òòEason€v.€Bruceóó,€No.€W2000„01326„COA„R3„CV,€2001€WL€502834,Ð tÄ Ðat€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€10,€2001)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed). Ý ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Tennessee€General€Assembly€has€identified€some€of€the€circumstances€that€might€cause€substantial€harmÐ ° Ðto€a€child.€€The€grounds€for€terminating€parental€rights€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„113(g)€(Supp.€2000)€provide€examplesÐ tÄ Ðof€circumstances€that€cause€substantial€harm€to€a€child.€€Other€examples€can€be€found€in€the€parental€relocation€statutesÐ 8ˆ Ð[Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„108(d)€(Supp.€2000)],€the€grandparent€visitation€statutes€[Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„6„306(b)(1)Ð üL Ð(Supp.€2000)],€and€the€statutory€definition€of€ð ðdependent€and€neglected€childðð€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„102(b)(12)Ð À Ð(Supp.€2000).€€While€these€statutes€are€not€intended€to€be€the€exclusive€source€for€circumstances€causing€substantial€harmÐ „Ô Ðto€children,€they€provide€helpful€guidance€to€the€courts. ÛÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€noted€in€its€first€memorandum€opinion€that€ð ðMr.€[Staggs]€has€only€been€stable€for€a€three€monthÐ ° ÐÔ_Ôperiod.ððÔ_Ô€€We€assume€that€the€trial€court€was€referring€to€the€period€of€time€following€Mr.€Ô_ÔStaggsððsÔ_Ô€marriage€in€AugustÐ tÄ Ð1999. ØÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Staggsððs€litigation€expenses€were€being€underwritten€by€his€girlfriendððs€father.€€By€this€time,€Mr.€StaggsÐ ° Ðand€Emily€Moore€had€decided€to€marry,€and€Mr.€Staggs€had€decided€that€he€wanted€to€take€on€the€responsibility€forÐ tÄ Ðraising€the€twins.€€Both€Ms.€Moore€and€her€parents€supported€this€decision. zÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€evidence€likewise€does€not€establish€clearly€and€convincingly€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔStaggsððsÔ_Ô€efforts€prior€to€MarchÐ ° Ð1999€to€establish€his€relationship€with€the€twins€were€unreasonable€or€not€in€good€faith. $Ý ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ_ÔBaggettÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔBaggettÔ_Ôóó,€512€S.W.2d€292,€293„94€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973).€€This€presumption€is€not€inflexible€andÐ ° Ðmust€give€way€to€other€considerations€in€appropriate€circumstances.€€òòRice€v.€Riceóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€684.€€The€fact€thatÐ tÄ Ðchildren€are€half„siblings€may€provide€a€basis€for€disregarding€the€presumption.€€ cÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMaintaining€a€Ô_ÔchildððsÔ_Ô€relationship€with€his€or€her€siblings€may,€of€necessity,€include€the€involvement€of€theÐ ° Ðcustodians€of€all€the€children.€€For€example,€a€court€could€decide€that€maintaining€the€relationship€among€siblingsÐ tÄ Ðrequires€permitting€a€child€to€visit€in€his€or€her€Ô_ÔsiblingððsÔ_Ô€home€under€the€supervision€of€that€Ô_ÔsiblingððsÔ_Ô€parent. vÝ ƒRýŽ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòIn€re€Ô_ÔL.S.W.óóÔ_Ô,€No.€M2000„01935„COA„R3„JV,€2001€WL€1013079,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€6,€2001);€òòIn€reÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔM.W.A.óóÔ_Ô,€980€S.W.2d€620,€622€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).- ù-(|G2ýŽ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôà•ò»»Ô d(|3‡$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OÍ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€OÍ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRY,3Ø'LetterXà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÑÀ°ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼OÍ»»»ÔÑ8€QXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îZüOÍÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼OÍ»îîZün#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€10,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XQX»¼OÍÔÌò òÔ#†¼OÍ»XXQW#ÔTONYA€PETRECE€RAY€v.€WILLIAM€MARTIN€RAYÔ‡XQX»¼OÍÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99D„662€€€€€€Carol€Soloman,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` AßÐ ¾   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„00895„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€5,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€appeal€involves€a€dispute€over€the€custody€of€three„year„old€twins€between€their€biologicalÐ ŒÜ  Ðfather€and€the€former€husband€of€their€biological€mother.€€The€biological€father€intervened€in€theÐ xÈ  Ðdivorce€€proceeding€between€the€twinsðð€mother€and€her€husband€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€DavidsonÐ d´ ÐCounty€seeking€custody€of€the€children.€€Following€a€bench€trial,€the€trial€court€declared€the€partiesÐ P  Ðdivorced€and€awarded€custody€of€the€partiesðð€two€biological€children€to€the€motherððs€former€husband.€Ð <Œ ÐThe€trial€court€also€concluded€that€the€motherððs€former€husband€was€comparatively€more€fit€than€theÐ (x Ðtwinsðð€biological€father€to€have€custody€of€the€twins.€€In€response€to€the€biological€fatherððs€Tenn.€R.Ð d ÐCiv.€P.€59.04€motion€suggesting€that€it€had€applied€the€wrong€legal€standard€when€it€determined€theÐ P Ðcustody€of€the€twins,€the€trial€court€found€that€placing€the€twins€with€their€biological€father€wouldÐ ì< Ðexpose€them€to€a€ð ðsubstantial€risk€and€danger€of€great€harm.ðð€€On€this€appeal,€the€twinsðð€biologicalÐ Ø( Ðfather€takes€issue€with€the€evidentiary€foundation€of€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€grant€him€custody€ofÐ Ä Ðhis€children.€€We€have€determined€that€the€record€does€not€contain€clear€and€convincing€evidenceÐ ° Ðto€support€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€placing€these€children€in€their€biological€fatherððs€custodyÐ œì Ðwill€expose€them€to€substantial€harm.€€Accordingly,€we€vacate€the€portion€of€the€decree€awardingÐ ˆØ Ðcustody€of€the€twins€to€their€biological€motherððs€former€husband.Ð tÄ ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed€in€PartÐ L œ Ðand€Vacated€in€Partó óÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼OÍ»àXQÄ#ÔÔ‡XQX.¼OÍÔWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€óóP.J.,€M.S.,Ð #`" Ðand€òòWilliam€B.€Cain,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ü#L# ÐÌClark€Lee€Shaw,€Nashville,€Tennessee€(on€appeal),€for€the€appellant,€Stephen€Eric€Staggs.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌJohn€M.€L.€Brown,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€William€M.€Ray.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÓÎ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼OÍ»XXQý #ÔÔ‡XQX»¼OÍÔÐ „)Ô$) ÐÌÔ#†¼OÍ»XXQç#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XQX»¼OÍÔà@¬¬)ìàò òI.ó óˆÐ \+¬&+ ÐÌà  àWilliam€M.€Ray€and€Tonya€P.€Ray€began€seeing€each€other€sometime€prior€to€1992.€€TheirÐ 4-„(- Ðfirst€child€was€born€in€October€1992.€€Ms.€Ray€was€nineteen€years€old,€and€Mr.€Ray€was€twenty„one.€Ð  .p).ý ÐThey€were€married€in€Lawrenceburg€on€May€28,€1994,€after€Ms.€Ray€discovered€that€she€wasÐ ° Ðpregnant€again.€€Their€second€child€was€born€in€October€1994.€€Mr.€Ray€held€down€several€jobs€toÐ œì Ðsupport€the€family,€and€Ms.€Ray€was€the€primary€caregiver€for€the€two€children.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€partiesðð€relationship€was€punctuated€by€frequent€arguments€and€fights.€€They€separatedÐ `° Ðin€early€1997,€and€Ms.€Ray€actually€filed€for€divorce.€€She€also€began€an€affair€with€Stephen€EricÐ L œ ÐStaggs€whom€she€had€met€through€mutual€friends.€€Mr.€Staggs€had€just€recently€received€a€less€thanÐ 8 ˆ Ðhonorable€discharge€from€the€Navy.€€He€was€also€married€to€his€high€school€sweetheart,€but€theyÐ $ t Ðwere€estranged,€and€Mr.€Staggs€was€then€living€with€his€mother.€€Ms.€Ray€had€sex€with€both€Mr.€RayÐ  ` Ðand€Mr.€Staggs€during€April€1997€and€sometime€in€May€or€June,€she€discovered€that€she€wasÐ ü L  Ðpregnant.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àMs.€Ray€and€Mr.€Staggs€parted€company€on€particularly€bad€terms€in€July€or€August€1997.€Ð À  ÐShe€told€him€that€there€was€a€chance€that€he€was€not€the€father,€and€he€told€her€that€he€hated€her€andÐ ¬ü  Ðnever€wanted€to€see€her€again.€€Approximately€six€weeks€later,€Ms.€Ray€reconciled€with€Mr.€Ray.€Ð ˜è  ÐShe€told€him€that€she€was€pregnant€with€twins€and€that€he€could€possibly€be€the€father.€€Mr.€Ray€toldÐ „Ô  Ðher€that€he€would€accept€the€children€whether€they€were€his€or€not.€€They€also€decided€that€theyÐ pÀ Ðshould€have€the€genetic€testing€performed,€not€to€determine€parentage,€but€for€future€medicalÐ \¬ Ðpurposes.€€However,€they€were€advised€to€defer€the€testing€until€after€the€babies€were€born.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àMs.€Ray€gave€birth€to€twins€on€December€19,€1997.€€They€were€approximately€one€monthÐ  p Ðpremature.€€Ms.€Ray€did€not€inform€Mr.€Staggs€of€the€birth€because€they€had€not€spoken€to€eachÐ  \ Ðother€since€they€broke€up.€€Mr.€Staggs€claims€to€have€made€some€effort€to€contact€Ms.€Ray,€but€hisÐ øH Ðattention€was€increasingly€focused€on€Emily€Catherine€Moore€whom€he€had€met€in€late€DecemberÐ ä4 Ðor€early€January.€€The€Rays€had€genetic€testing€performed€in€February€1998.€€However,€Ms.€Ray€hadÐ Ð  Ðthe€envelope€containing€the€results€sealed,€and€Mr.€Ray€had€the€sealed€envelope€placed€in€hisÐ ¼  Ðmotherððs€safety€deposit€box€at€the€bank.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àBy€this€time,€both€Mr.€Ray€and€Ms.€Ray€were€working€at€the€Vanderbilt€Medical€Group.€Ð €Ð ÐThey€worked€at€raising€the€four€children.€€Mr.€Ray€did€not€treat€the€twins€differently€from€the€twoÐ l¼ Ðolder€children.€€The€Rays€did€not€discuss€the€parentage€of€the€twins,€but€Ms.€Rayððs€ð ðmotherððsÐ X ¨ Ðintuitionðð€led€her€to€believe€that€Mr.€Staggs,€not€Mr.€Ray,€was€the€childrenððs€father.€€She€did€notÐ D!” Ðshare€her€belief€with€Mr.€Ray.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àBy€February€1999,€the€Raysðð€relationship€had€again€deteriorated.€€They€had€a€particularly€uglyÐ $X" Ðconfrontation€on€February€28,€1999,€apparently€precipitated€by€a€visit€by€Ms.€Rayððs€sister€who€wasÐ ô$D # Ðliving€in€Texas.€€Ms.€Ray€angrily€told€Mr.€Ray€that€he€was€not€the€twinsðð€father.€€Both€parties€filedÐ à%0!$ Ðpetitions€for€protection€on€March€2,€1999,€and€Ms.€Ray€filed€a€complaint€for€divorce€in€the€CircuitÐ Ì&"% ÐCourt€for€Davidson€County€on€March€3,€1999.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÐ ¤(ô#' Ðà  àFollowing€a€March€25,€1999€hearing€on€the€petitions€for€protective€orders,€the€trial€courtÐ ° Ðgranted€Mr.€Ray€a€protective€order,€directed€Ms.€Ray€to€move€out€of€the€marital€residence,€andÐ œì Ðgranted€the€parties€shared€custody€of€all€four€children€with€Mr.€Ray€as€the€primary€physicalÐ ˆØ Ðcustodian.€€Ms.€Ray€took€issue€with€this€order,€and€in€a€ð ðmotion€for€new€trialðð€insisted€that€the€trialÐ tÄ Ðcourt€should€not€have€awarded€Mr.€Ray€primary€physical€custody€of€the€twins€because€paternity€testsÐ `° Ðhad€rebutted€the€presumption€that€he€was€their€biological€father.€€She€also€got€word€to€Mr.€StaggsÐ L œ Ðthrough€his€grandmother€that€he€was€the€biological€father€of€the€twins.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àUpon€receiving€word€from€Ms.€Ray€about€the€twins,€Mr.€Staggs€obtained€his€own€geneticÐ  ` Ðtesting€that€confirmed€that€he€was€their€biological€father.€€In€May€1999,€he€sought€permission€toÐ ü L  Ðintervene€in€the€Raysðð€divorce€proceeding€and€to€file€a€complaint€to€establish€paternity.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trialÐ è 8  Ðcourt€granted€these€motions€in€June€1999,€and€Mr.€Staggs€immediately€requested€temporary€custodyÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€twins.€€Both€Mr.€Ray€and€Ms.€Ray€opposed€his€request€for€custody,€and€Mr.€Ray€filed€aÐ À  Ðcounterclaim€against€Mr.€Staggs€seeking€retroactive€child€support.€€Thereafter,€Mr.€Staggs€requestedÐ ¬ü  Ðtemporary€visitation€with€the€twins.€€The€Rays€also€opposed€this€request.€€Following€a€hearing€onÐ ˜è  ÐAugust€6,€1999,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€concluding€that€Mr.€Staggs€was€the€twinsðð€biologicalÐ „Ô  Ðfather€and€establishing€a€visitation€schedule€for€him€that€enabled€him€to€have€unsupervised€visitsÐ pÀ Ðwith€the€children€for€four€hours€on€Thursday€afternoons€and€eight€hours€on€Saturday.€€The€trial€courtÐ \¬ Ðdenied€Mr.€Staggsððs€request€for€overnight€visitation€because€he€and€Emily€Moore€were€not€marriedÐ H˜ Ðat€the€time.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAt€about€this€time,€Ms.€Ray€became€involved€with€a€childhood€friend€named€Richard€Moss.Ð  \ ÐIn€her€words,€they€ð ðwent€to€a€place€where€we€should€not€have€went,ðð€and€Ms.€Ray€soon€discoveredÐ øH Ðthat€she€was€pregnant€with€Mr.€Mossððs€child.€In€the€meantime,€Mr.€Staggs€and€Ms.€Moore€decidedÐ ä4 Ðto€move€up€their€wedding€date€to€bolster€his€request€for€overnight€visitation€with€the€twins.€€Mr.Ð Ð  ÐStaggs€and€Ms.€Moore€were€married€on€August€27,€1999€in€a€civil€ceremony,€and€approximately€twoÐ ¼  Ðweeks€later,€Mr.€Staggs€filed€a€motion€seeking€overnight€visitation.€€Both€the€Rays€again€opposedÐ ¨ø Ðthis€motion.€€Approximately€three€months€later,€Mr.€Staggs€requested€overnight€visitation€onÐ ”ä ÐNovember€20,€1999€to€enable€the€twins€to€be€present€when€he€and€his€new€wife€conducted€aÐ €Ð Ðð ðtraditional€wedding€ceremony.ðð€€On€November€9,€1999,€the€trial€court€replaced€Mr.€Staggsððs€four„Ð l¼ Ðhour€Thursday€visitation€with€visitation€from€Tuesday€afternoon€until€Wednesday€morning.€€The€trialÐ X ¨ Ðcourt€also€permitted€the€overnight€visitation€to€coincide€with€Mr.€Staggsððs€and€Ms.€MooreððsÐ D!” Ðtraditional€wedding.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€conducted€a€bench€trial€on€December€9€and€10,€1999.€€Mr.€Ray€and€Ms.€RayÐ $X" Ðstipulated€that€each€of€them€had€grounds€for€divorce€and€requested€that€they€be€declared€divorcedÐ ô$D # Ðin€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„129(b)€(Supp.€2000).€€They€also€agreed€on€the€financialÐ à%0!$ Ðaspects€of€their€divorce.€€Except€for€these€issues,€the€entire€hearing€focused€on€the€three€partiesððÐ Ì&"% Ðdispute€over€custody€of€the€children.€€While€Ms.€Ray€conceded€that€Mr.€Ray€was€a€good€father,€sheÐ ¸'#& Ðopposed€awarding€him€custody€of€their€two€older€children€because€his€work€hours€were€too€long,€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðshe€insisted€that€he€should€not€receive€custody€of€the€twins€because€he€was€not€their€biological€father.€Ð ° ÐShe€also€insisted€that€Mr.€Staggs€was€completely€unfit€to€take€on€the€responsibilities€associated€withÐ œì Ðbeing€the€twinsðð€custodial€parent.€€For€his€part,€Mr.€Ray€agreed€that€Ms.€Ray€could€be€a€good€motherÐ ˆØ Ðwhen€she€decided€to€be€but€that€she€should€not€be€awarded€custody€of€any€of€the€children€becauseÐ tÄ Ðof€her€personal€conduct€and€her€demonstrated€lack€of€attention€to€the€childrenððs€needs.€€He€alsoÐ `° Ðasserted€that€Mr.€Staggs€was€not€fit€to€have€custody€of€the€twins.€€Mr.€Staggs€asserted€that€he€and€hisÐ L œ Ðnew€wife€could€provide€the€twins€with€a€more€stable,€nurturing€home€than€either€Mr.€Ray€or€Ms.€RayÐ 8 ˆ Ðcould€provide.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€undertook€to€resolve€the€custody€question€by€first€comparing€the€custodialÐ ü L  Ðfitness€of€Mr.€Ray€with€the€custodial€fitness€of€Ms.€Ray.€€The€trial€court€concluded€that€Ms.€Ray€wasÐ è 8  Ðð ðnot€a€fit€and€proper€personðð€to€have€sole€custody€of€any€of€her€four€children.€€Then€the€trial€courtÐ Ô$  Ðturned€to€the€competing€custody€claims€of€Mr.€Ray€and€Mr.€Staggs.€€The€trial€court€determined€thatÐ À  ÐMr.€Ray€was€comparably€more€fit€than€Mr.€Staggs€to€have€custody€of€the€twins€even€though€he€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðnot€their€biological€father.€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€granted€custody€of€the€twins€to€Mr.€Ray€Ð ˜è  Ðbecause€ð ðthere€are€no€fit€natural€parents€and€.€.€.€Mr.€Ray€has€been€the€stable€source€to€the€childrenÐ „Ô  Ðthroughout€their€short€lives.ðð€€The€trial€court€also€determined€that€ð ð[t]he€emotional€ties€of€theÐ pÀ Ðchildren€to€each€other€are€so€strong€that€separation€would€be€detrimental€to€them.ðð€€In€addition€to€itsÐ \¬ Ðcustody€decisions,€the€court€directed€Mr.€Staggs€to€pay€$9,906€in€back€child€support€from€the€dateÐ H˜ Ðof€the€twinsðð€birth€and€granted€him€four€hours€of€supervised€visitation€in€Mr.€Rayððs€home€every€otherÐ 4„ ÐSunday.€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àMr.€Staggs€hired€a€new€lawyer€who€filed€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€59.04€motion€to€alter€or€amendÐ øH Ðchallenging€the€legal€and€factual€basis€of€the€trial€courtððs€custody€decision.€€Ms.€Ray€also€filed€aÐ ä4 Ðmotion€to€alter€or€amend€complaining€that€the€trial€court€had€awarded€her€less€than€standardÐ Ð  Ðvisitation€with€the€two€older€children€and€that€the€trial€court€had€erred€by€awarding€custody€of€theÐ ¼  Ðtwins€to€Mr.€Ray€because€he€was€not€their€biological€father€and€because€the€trial€court€had€failed€toÐ ¨ø Ðfind€that€the€twins€ð ðwould€suffer€substantial€harm€if€placed€with€either€biological€parent.ðð€€InÐ ”ä Ðresponse€to€these€motions,€the€trial€court€filed€a€ð ðmemorandum€of€findings€and€orderðð€on€April€3,Ð €Ð Ð2000€stating,€in€part:Ð l¼ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIn€addition€to€those€reasons€enumerated€in€the€MemorandumÐ D!” Ðand€Order€previously€filed€and€entered€by€this€Court,€and€for€some€ofÐ 0"€  Ðthe€following€reasons€listed€herein,€this€Court€further€finds€that€thereÐ #l! Ðis€a€strong€likelihood€of€substantial€harm€to€the€minor€childrenÐ $X" Ðbecause€of€both€natural€parentsðð€use€of€drugs,€instability€inÐ ô$D # Ðrelationships,€the€natural€fatherððs€history€of€family€mental€illness,€lackÐ à%0!$ Ðof€fatherððs€connection€with€his€family,€anger€undisputed€in€naturalÐ Ì&"% Ðfather,€Motherððs€living€with€an€abusive€man,€motherððs€pregnancy€byÐ ¸'#& Ðanother€man€out€of€wedlock,€Motherððs€allowing€children€in€bed€withÐ ¤(ô#' Ðher€and€a€man€to€whom€she€is€not€married,€natural€Fatherððs€lack€ofÐ )à$( Ðinterest€in€trying€to€determine€paternity€until€the€children€were€almostÐ |*Ì%) Ðtwo€years€old,€Fatherððs€taking€no€part€in€the€young€childrenððsÐ h+¸&* Ðformative€years€and€leaving€them€to€fend€for€themselves,€and€FatherÐ T,¤'+ Ðfailing€to€pay€adequate€support€even€after€he€learned€he€was€theÐ ° ÐFather,€and€Mother€leaving€the€children€with€a€known€pedofile€[sic].€Ð œì ÐThis€Court€finds€that€for€all€those€reasons,€it€is€in€the€best€interest€ofÐ ˆØ Ðthe€minor€children€that€they€remain€with€the€only€stable€force€in€theirÐ tÄ Ðlife,€the€legal€father,€Mr.€Ray.€€This€Court€previously€found€bothÐ `° Ðnatural€parents€to€be€unfit.€€This€Court€still€declares€them€to€be€unfitÐ L œ Ðeven€with€the€attorney€for€the€natural€Father,€Mr.€Staggs,€stating€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðopen€Court€that€as€soon€as€this€Order€is€final,€he€intends€to€fileÐ $ t Ðanother€Petition€for€custody.€€This€Court€would€not€be€doing€her€dutyÐ  ` Ðto€leave€two€helpless€children€with€unfit€parent€[sic]€and€in€harmððsÐ ü L  Ðway.Ðè 8 ` x` x ÐÌIn€addition€to€this€language,€the€trial€court€wrote€by€hand€that€Ð À  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThis€court€finds€by€very€clear€and€convincing€proof€that€there€is€aÐ ˜è  Ðsubstantial€risk€and€danger€of€great€harm€to€these€children€if€placedÐ „Ô  Ðwith€the€natural€parents.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌApproximately€one€month€after€concluding€that€placing€the€twins€with€Mr.€Staggs€would€exposeÐ H˜ Ðthem€to€a€substantial€risk€of€danger,€the€trial€court€permitted€Mr.€Staggs€to€have€eight€days€ofÐ 4„ Ðextended€visitation€with€them€for€an€extended€vacation€with€the€Moore€family.Ð  p ÐÌà@……)ìàò òII.ó óˆÐ øH Ðà@##ìàòòò òThe€Custody€of€the€Twinsó óóóˆÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àThis€appeal€focuses€on€the€competing€custody€claims€of€Mr.€Staggs€and€Mr.€Ray.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mr.Ð ¼  ÐStaggs€asserts€that,€notwithstanding€the€trial€courtððs€ð ðattempt€to€ððpadðð€its€initial€ruling,€in€anticipationÐ ¨ø Ðof€this€appeal,ðð€the€evidence€does€not€support€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€he€is€unfit€to€haveÐ ”ä Ðcustody€of€his€children€and€that€giving€him€custody€would€expose€them€to€a€substantial€risk€ofÐ €Ð Ðdanger.€€We€agree.€€The€record€does€not€contain€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that,€based€on€theÐ l¼ Ðcircumstances€existing€at€the€time€of€the€December€1999€trial,€granting€Mr.€Staggs€custody€of€hisÐ X ¨ Ðtwo„year„old€twins€would€expose€the€children€to€a€risk€of€substantial€harm.Ð D!” ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òA.ó óˆÐ #l! ÐÌà  àThe€legal€standards€applicable€to€custody€disputes€between€a€biological€parent€and€a€thirdÐ ô$D # Ðparty€differ€markedly€from€those€applicable€to€custody€disputes€between€biological€parents.€€TheÐ à%0!$ Ðcomparative€fitness€analysis€commonly€associated€with€custody€disputes€between€biological€parentsÐ Ì&"% Ðcannot€be€used€because€it€fails€to€take€into€account€that€the€custody€claims€of€biological€parents€andÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€custody€claims€of€third€parties€do€not€have€the€same€legal€weight.€€A€biological€parentððs€custodyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðclaims€carry€more€weight€than€those€of€a€third€party€because€only€biological€parents€have€aÐ )à$( Ðconstitutionally€protected€interest€in€raising€their€children.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòStubblefield€v.€State€ex€rel.€Fjelstadóó,€171Ð ° ÐTenn.€580,€587„88,€106€S.W.2d€558,€561€(1937);€òòDoles€v.€Dolesóó,€848€S.W.2d€656,€660€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð œì ÐApp.€1992).€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àA€biological€parentððs€interest€in€the€care,€custody,€and€control€of€his€or€her€child€is€amongÐ `° Ðthe€oldest€of€the€judicially€recognized€fundamental€liberty€interests.€€òòTroxel€v.€Granvilleóó,€530€U.S.Ð L œ Ð57,€65,€120€S.€Ct.€2054,€2060€(2000).€€It€is€protected€not€only€by€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€theÐ 8 ˆ ÐFourteenth€Amendment,€òòSantosky€v.€Krameróó,€455€U.S.€745,€753,€102€S.€Ct.€1388,€1394€(1982),€butÐ $ t Ðalso€by€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€8.€€òòHawk€v.€Hawkóó,€855€S.W.2d€573,€579€(Tenn.€1993).€€Accordingly,Ð  ` Ðbiological€parents€have€a€constitutionally€protected€interest€in€raising€their€children€free€fromÐ ü L  Ðunwarranted€state€intervention.€€òòDoe€v.€Sundquistóó,€2€S.W.3d€919,€926€(Tenn.€1999);€òòIn€re€Swansonóó,Ð è 8  Ð2€S.W.3d€180,€186€(Tenn.€1999);€òòNash„Putnam€v.€McCloudóó,€921€S.W.2d€170,€174„75€(Tenn.€1996).€Ð Ô$  ÐThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€extended€this€protection€to€the€biological€parents€of€nonmaritalÐ À  Ðchildren€as€long€as€they€have€developed€a€substantial€relationship€with€the€child€and€have€not€beenÐ ¬ü  Ðfound€to€be€unfit.€€òòPetrosky€v.€Keeneóó,€898€S.W.2d€726,€728€(Tenn.€1995);€òòNale€v.€Robertsonóó,€871Ð ˜è  ÐS.W.2d€674,€680€(Tenn.€1994).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àPersons€who€are€not€a€childððs€biological€parent€do€not€have€the€same€constitutionallyÐ \¬ Ðprotected€parenting€interests€possessed€by€a€biological€parent.€€Accordingly,€when€faced€withÐ H˜ Ðcompeting€custody€claims€by€a€biological€parent€and€a€third€party,€the€courts€must€favor€theÐ 4„ Ðbiological€parent.€€The€courts€cannot€award€custody€to€a€third€party€instead€of€a€biological€parentÐ  p Ðunless€the€third€party€can€demonstrate€that€the€child€will€be€exposed€to€substantial€harm€if€custodyÐ  \ Ðis€awarded€to€the€biological€parent.€€In€other€words,€a€biological€parent€cannot€be€denied€custodyÐ øH Ðunless€he€or€she€is€found€to€be€unfit.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àThe€courts€have€not€undertaken€to€define€the€circumstances€that€pose€a€risk€of€substantialÐ ¼  Ðharm€to€a€child.׃< ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€These€circumstances€are€not€amenable€to€precise€definition€because€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðâ âvariability€of€human€conduct.€€However,€the€use€of€the€modifier€ð ðsubstantialðð€indicates€two€things.€Ð ”ä ÐFirst,€it€connotes€a€real€hazard€or€danger€that€is€not€minor,€trivial,€or€insignificant.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Second,€itÐ ° Ðâ âindicates€that€the€harm€must€be€more€than€a€theoretical€possibility.€€While€the€harm€need€not€beÐ œì Ðinevitable,€it€must€be€sufficiently€probable€to€prompt€a€reasonable€person€to€believe€that€the€harmÐ ˆØ Ðwill€occur€more€likely€than€not.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€courts€have€likewise€not€provided€clear€directions€regarding€the€amount€of€proof€requiredÐ L œ Ðto€establish€that€a€child€will€be€exposed€to€substantial€harm€if€he€or€she€is€placed€in€the€custody€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ða€biological€parent€rather€than€a€third€party.€€Over€sixty€years€ago,€in€a€suit€involving€a€custodyÐ $ t Ðdispute€between€a€four„year„old€childððs€biological€father€and€her€great„grandfather€and€great„uncle,Ð  ` Ðthe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€fatherððs€unfitness€must€be€established€by€ð ða€clearÐ ü L  Ðpreponderance€of€convincing€proof.ðð€€òòStubblefield€v.€State€ex€rel.€Fjelstadóó,€171€Tenn.€at€587,€106Ð è 8  ÐS.W.2d€at€560.€€We€have€likewise€invoked€this€standard€of€proof€in€other€custody€disputes€betweenÐ Ô$  Ðparents€and€third€parties.€€òòMoore€v.€Mooreóó,€No.€03A01„9708„CH„00382,€1998€WL€758995,€at€*3Ð À  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€30,€1998)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed);€òòHenderson€v.€Mabryóó,€838Ð ¬ü  ÐS.W.2d€537,€540€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);€òòDunavant€v.€Dunavantóó,€31€Tenn.€App.€634,€645,€219Ð ˜è  ÐS.W.2d€910,€914„15€(1949).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€reason€for€adopting€this€heightened€burden€of€proof€in€custody€disputes€between€aÐ \¬ Ðbiological€parent€and€a€third€party€is€the€same€as€the€reason€for€adopting€a€heightened€standard€inÐ H˜ Ðtermination€of€parental€rights€cases.€€The€state€and€federal€constitutions€require€a€heightened€standardÐ 4„ Ðbecause€of€the€possible€effects€the€proceeding€might€have€on€a€biological€parentððs€parenting€rights.€Ð  p ÐòòOððDaniel€v.€Messieróó,€905€S.W.2d€182,€187€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€To€prevent€unwarrantedÐ  \ Ðtermination€or€interference€with€a€biological€parentððs€parenting€rights,׃*ì×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€grounds€for€judicial€actionÐ øH Ðmust€be€established€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„113(c)(1);€òòInÐ ä4 Ðre€C.W.W.óó,€37€S.W.3d€467,€473€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000);€òòState€Depððt€of€Human€Servs.€v.€Defrieceóó,€937Ð Ð  ÐS.W.2d€954,€960€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€Evidence€that€satisfies€this€heightened€burden€of€proofÐ ¼  Ðeliminates€any€serious€or€substantial€doubt€concerning€the€correctness€of€the€conclusion€to€be€drawnÐ ¨ø Ðfrom€the€evidence,€òòWalton€v.€Youngóó,€950€S.W.2d€956,€960€(Tenn.€1997);€òòHodges€v.€S.C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,Ð ”ä Ð833€S.W.2d€896,€901€n.3€(Tenn.€1992);€òòIn€re€C.D.B.óó,€37€S.W.3d€925,€927€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).€Ð €Ð ÐIt€should€produce€in€the€fact„finderððs€mind€a€firm€belief€or€conviction€regarding€the€truth€of€theÐ l¼ Ðallegations€sought€to€be€established.€€òòOððDaniel€v.€Messieróó,€905€S.W.2d€at€188.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€ð ðclear€preponderance€of€convincing€proofðð€standard€traditionally€associated€with€custodyÐ 0"€  Ðdisputes€between€biological€parents€and€third€parties€is,€as€a€practical€matter,€the€same€as€the€ð ðclearÐ #l! Ðand€convincing€evidenceðð€standard€associated€with€termination€of€parental€rights€cases.€Ð ° ÐAccordingly,€to€avoid€the€risk€of€confusion€between€the€heightened€burden€of€proof€required€by€thisÐ œì Ðstandard,€and€the€standard€of€appellate€review€used€to€review€cases€of€this€sort,€we€will€characterizeÐ ˆØ Ðthe€burden€of€proof€in€these€cases€as€the€ð ðclear€and€convincing€evidenceðð€standard.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àBecause€this€heightened€burden€of€proof€differs€from€the€customary€burden€of€proof€in€civilÐ L œ Ðcases,€we€must€adjust€the€usual€standard€of€review€of€factual€findings€found€in€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð 8 ˆ Ð13(d).€€In€cases€such€as€the€one€before€us,€we€will€review€the€trial€courts€specific€findings€of€fact€inÐ $ t Ðaccordance€with€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€Accordingly,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€will€beÐ  ` Ðpresumed€to€be€correct€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€Then€we€will€determineÐ ü L  Ðwhether€the€facts,€as€found€by€the€trial€court,€clearly€and€convincingly€establish€that€a€child€will€beÐ è 8  Ðexposed€to€a€risk€of€substantial€harm€if€he€or€she€is€placed€in€a€biological€parentððs€custody.€€òòIn€reÐ Ô$  ÐL.S.W.óó,€2001€WL€1013078,€at€*5;€òòIn€re€T.L.P.óó,€No.€W1999„01940„COA„R3„CV,€2001€WL€987152,Ð À  Ðat€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€22,€2001).€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà@)ìàò òB.ó óˆÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àWe€now€turn€to€the€substance€of€the€trial€courtððs€custody€decision.€€Like€any€other€custodyÐ \¬ Ðdecision,€we€recognize€at€the€outset€that€trial€courts€have€broad€discretion€to€fashion€custodyÐ H˜ Ðarrangements€that€best€suit€the€unique€circumstances€of€each€case.€€òòParker€v.€Parkeróó,€986€S.W.2dÐ 4„ Ð557,€563€(Tenn.€1999).€€Our€role€is€not€to€ð ðtweak€[these€decisions]€.€.€.€in€the€hopes€of€achieving€aÐ  p Ðmore€reasonable€result€than€the€trial€court.ðð€€Rather,€it€is€to€determine€whether€the€trial€courtððsÐ  \ Ðdecision€ð ðfalls€outside€the€spectrum€of€rulings€that€might€reasonably€result€from€an€application€ofÐ øH Ðthe€correct€legal€standards€to€the€evidence€found€in€the€record.ðð€€òòEldridge€v.€Eldridgeóó,€42€S.W.3d€82,Ð ä4 Ð88€(Tenn.€2001).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àCustody€decisions€should€not€be€used€to€punish€parents€for€past€misconduct€or€to€awardÐ ¨ø Ðparents€for€exemplary€behavior.€€òòRice€v.€Riceóó,€983€S.W.2d€680,€683€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);Ð ”ä ÐòòAdelsperger€v.€Adelspergeróó,€970€S.W.2d€482,€485€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997);€òòGaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936Ð €Ð ÐS.W.2d€t€630.€€The€courts€understand€that€persons€are€able€to€turn€their€lives€around,€òòsee€In€re€Askewóó,Ð l¼ Ð993€S.W.2d€1,€2€(Tenn.€1999).€€Accordingly,€custody€decisions€should€focus€on€the€partiesðð€presentÐ X ¨ Ðand€anticipated€circumstances,€òòHall€v.€Hallóó,€No.€01A01„9310„PB„00465,€1995€WL€316255,€at€*2Ð D!” Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€25,€1995)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed),€and€on€the€partiesððÐ 0"€  Ðcurrent€fitness€to€be€custodians€of€children.€€òòSee€Elder€v.€Elderóó,€No.€M1998„00935„COA„R3„CV,Ð #l! Ð2001€WL€1077961,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€14,€2001);€òòGorski€v.€Ragainsóó,€No.€01A01„9710„GS„Ð $X" Ð00597,€1999€WL€511451,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€21,€1999)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€applicationÐ ô$D # Ðfiled).€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThe€courts€may€and€should€consider€past€conduct€to€the€extent€that€it€assists€in€determiningÐ ¸'#& Ða€personððs€current€parenting€skills€or€in€predicting€whether€a€person€will€be€capable€of€havingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcustody€of€a€child.€€However,€the€consideration€of€past€conduct€must€be€tempered€by€the€realizationÐ )à$( Ðthat€the€persons€competing€for€custody,€like€other€human€beings,€have€their€own€virtues€and€vices.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐòòGaskill€v.€Gaskillóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€630.€€Biological€parents€are€not€required€to€demonstrate€they€areÐ h+¸&* Ðperfect€before€they€can€be€granted€custody€of€their€children.€€òòRichard€v.€Richardóó,€No.€M1999„02797„Ð T,¤'+ ÐCOA„R3„CV,€2000€WL€679233,€at€*5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€25,€2000)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11Ð ° Ðapplication€filed);€òòRice€v.€Riceóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€682„83.Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€based€its€decision€to€deny€Mr.€Staggs€custody€on€eleven€findings€regardingÐ tÄ Ð(1)€his€efforts€to€develop€a€substantial€relationship€with€the€twins,€(2)€his€relationship€with€his€fatherÐ `° Ðand€brother,€(3)€his€personal€conduct,€and€(4)€his€relationship€with€Mr.€Ray.€€Despite€the€largelyÐ L œ Ðundisputed€evidence€that€Mr.€Staggs€had€turned€over€a€new€leaf€with€the€help€of€his€wife€and€herÐ 8 ˆ Ðfamily,€the€trial€court€apparently€decided€that€his€transformation€was€too€short„lived€to€outweigh€hisÐ $ t Ðprior€conduct.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€have€determined€that€the€factors€relied€upon€by€the€trial€court€do€not€establishÐ  ` Ðclearly€and€convincingly€that€Mr.€Staggs€would€be€an€unfit€parent€or€that€placing€the€twins€in€hisÐ ü L  Ðcustody€would€expose€them€to€a€risk€of€substantial€harm.Ð è 8  ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò1.ˆÐ À  Ðà@ìàMr.€Staggsððs€Efforts€to€Develop€a€Substantial€à@@ìàRelationship€With€the€TwinsˆÐ ¬ü  ÐÌó óà  àThree€of€the€trial€courtððs€reasons€for€finding€Mr.€Staggs€unfit€are:€(1)€his€ð ðlack€of€interest€inÐ „Ô  Ðtrying€to€determine€paternity€until€the€children€were€almost€two€years€old,ðð€(2)€his€ð ðtaking€no€partÐ pÀ Ðin€the€young€childrenððs€formative€years€and€leaving€them€to€fend€for€themselves,ðð€and€(3)€his€ð ðfailingÐ \¬ Ðto€pay€adequate€support€even€after€he€learned€he€was€the€[f]ather.ðð€€Each€of€these€findings€is€relevantÐ H˜ Ðto€the€important€threshold€question€regarding€the€nature€of€Mr.€Staggsððs€relationship€with€theÐ 4„ Ðchildren.€€As€the€biological€father€of€nonmarital€children,€Mr.€Staggs€will€be€permitted€to€invoke€hisÐ  p Ðparental€rights€only€if€he€has€developed€a€substantial€relationship€with€his€children€or€he€hasÐ  \ Ðattempted€in€good€faith€to€do€so.€€òòPetrosky€v.€Keeneóó,€898€S.W.2d€at€728;€òòState€ex€rel.€Cihlar€v.Ð øH ÐCrawfordóó,€39€S.W.3d€172,€182€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000);€òòIn€re€Hoodóó,€930€S.W.2d€575,€578„79€(Tenn.Ð ä4 ÐCt.€App.€1996).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWhen€Ms.€Ray€was€pregnant€with€the€twins,€both€Mr.€Ray€and€Mr.€Staggs€knew€that€she€hadÐ ¨ø Ðhad€sex€with€each€of€them.€€She€told€both€of€them€that€they€could€be€the€father.€€After€her€five„monthÐ ”ä Ðrelationship€with€Mr.€Staggs€ended,€Ms.€Ray€returned€to€Mr.€Ray.€€While€they€did€not€move€fromÐ €Ð Ðthe€house€where€Mr.€Ray€had€been€living,€Mr.€and€Ms.€Ray€obtained€an€unlisted€telephone€number.€Ð l¼ ÐMs.€Ray€did€not€attempt€to€contact€Mr.€Staggs€because€ð ðeverything€was€going€okayðð€with€Mr.€Ray.€Ð X ¨ ÐFor€his€part,€Mr.€Staggs€attempted€to€find€Ms.€Ray€by€telephone€at€her€old€telephone€number,€byÐ D!” Ðvisiting€where€he€thought€she€lived,€and€by€trying€to€find€her€through€mutual€friends.€€He€wasÐ 0"€  Ðunsuccessful.€€As€time€passed€without€any€word€from€Ms.€Ray,€Mr.€Staggs€assumed€either€that€Ms.Ð #l! ÐRay€had€miscarried€or€that€the€children€were€not€his.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àMr.€Staggs€learned€in€March€1999€that€the€twins€had€been€born€and€that€Ms.€Ray€wasÐ à%0!$ Ðasserting€that€he€was€their€father.€€He€promptly€sought€genetic€testing€in€April€1999€and€moved€toÐ Ì&"% Ðintervene€in€the€Raysðð€pending€divorce€proceeding€one€month€later€after€the€tests€confirmed€that€heÐ ¸'#& Ðwas€the€twinsðð€biological€father.€€He€has€been€exercising€unsupervised€visitation€with€the€childrenÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsince€August€1999.€€While€he€expressed€some€reluctance€about€paying€retroactive€child€support,€theÐ ° Ðrecord€contains€no€evidence€that€Mr.€Staggs€has€refused€to€comply€with€any€court€order€regardingÐ œì Ðsupport€or€visitation.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWhen€Mr.€Staggs€first€sought€to€intervene€in€this€case€in€May€1999,€he€had€virtually€noÐ `° Ðcontact€with€the€children.€€At€that€point,€there€may€have€been€a€substantial€question€regardingÐ L œ Ðwhether€he€was€entitled€to€invoke€his€rights€as€a€biological€parent€either€because€he€did€not€have€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðsubstantial€relationship€with€the€children€or€because€he€had€not€made€good€faith€efforts€to€establishÐ $ t Ða€substantial€relationship.€€However,€as€a€result€of€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€give€Mr.€StaggsÐ  ` Ðvisitation€rights,€he€had€developed€a€relationship€with€the€children€by€the€time€of€the€trial€inÐ ü L  ÐDecember€1999.€The€trial€court€has€not€found€that€Mr.€Staggsððs€relationship€with€the€twins€isÐ è 8  Ðinsubstantial€and,€in€fact,€has€reinforced€the€relationship€by€granting€Mr.€Staggs€continuing€visitationÐ Ô$  Ðrights.€€In€light€of€these€developments,€the€record€does€not€contain€clear€and€convincing€evidence€thatÐ À  ÐMr.€Staggs€does€not€presently€have€a€substantial€relationship€with€the€children.€€Accordingly,€the€trialÐ ¬ü  Ðcourt€erred€by€basing€its€custody€decision€on€Mr.€Staggsððs€efforts,€or€lack€of€efforts,€to€develop€aÐ ˜è  Ðsubstantial€relationship€with€the€partiesðð€children€prior€to€March€1999.׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð „Ô  ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò2.ó óˆÐ \¬ Ðà@¾ ¾ ìàò òMr.€Staggsððs€Relationship€With€His€Familyó óˆÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€also€decided€that€Mr.€Staggs€would€be€an€unfit€parent€because€of€(1)€theÐ  p Ðð ðhistory€of€family€mental€illnessðð€and€(2)€his€ð ðlack€of€.€.€.€connection€with€his€family.ðð€It€is€unclearÐ  \ Ðprecisely€how€either€of€these€factors€reflects€on€Mr.€Staggsððs€fitness€because€the€record€contains€noÐ øH Ðevidence€that€he€exhibits€any€sign€of€mental€illness€or€that€his€estranged€relationship€with€his€fatherÐ ä4 Ðand€brother€colors€his€parenting€ability.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àMr.€Staggs€was€extremely€close€to€his€mother;€so€close€that€he€sought€an€early€discharge€fromÐ ¨ø Ðthe€Navy€to€be€with€her€when€she€fell€ill.€€His€father€and€one€of€his€brothers€are€mentally€ill,€and€Mr.Ð ”ä ÐStaggs€has€been€estranged€from€them€for€some€time€because€he€views€them,€with€some€cause,€asÐ €Ð Ðnegative€influences€in€his€life.€€He€maintains€a€close€relationship€with€another€brother€and€his€familyÐ l¼ Ðand€with€his€grandparents,€a€cousin,€and€an€uncle.€€Without€more,€this€sort€of€family€estrangementÐ X ¨ Ðdoes€not€provide€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€placing€Mr.€Staggsððs€children€in€his€custody€willÐ D!” Ðexpose€them€to€substantial€harm.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò3.ó óˆÐ $X" Ðà@¾¾ìàò òMr.€Staggsððs€Personal€Conductó óˆÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€also€based€its€custody€decision€on€(1)€Mr.€Staggsððs€admitted€use€of€illegalÐ Ì&"% Ðdrugs,€(2)€his€smoking,€(3)€his€anger,€(4)€his€ð ðinstability€in€relationships,ðð€and€(5)€his€decision€to€liveÐ ¸'#& Ðâ âwith€his€present€wife€before€they€were€married.€€All€of€these€matters€are€relevant€to€a€custodyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdetermination.€€However,€the€evidence€regarding€each€of€these€matters€indicates€that€they€do€notÐ ° Ðcurrently€undermine€Mr.€Staggsððs€fitness€to€have€custody€of€his€children.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àBy€the€end€of€its€consideration€of€the€case,€the€trial€court€had€received€undisputed€evidenceÐ tÄ Ð(1)€that€Mr.€Staggs€had€not€used€marijuana€or€any€other€illegal€drug€since€the€spring€of€1997,€(2)€thatÐ `° Ðhe€had€married€his€fiance€in€August€1999,€and€(3)€that€he€and€his€new€wife€had€stopped€smokingÐ L œ Ðbecause€they€understood€that€smoking€aggravated€the€childrenððs€eczema€and€asthma.€€Accordingly,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthe€evidence€of€this€past€problematic€conduct€does€not€demonstrate€clearly€and€convincingly€thatÐ $ t Ðplacing€the€children€in€Mr.€Staggsððs€custody€would€presently€expose€them€to€substantial€harm.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àThe€remaining€two€matters€singled€out€by€the€trial€court€were€Mr.€Staggsððs€ð ðangerðð€and€theÐ è 8  Ðð ðinstabilityðð€in€his€relationships.€€The€fact€that€Mr.€Staggs€had€been€married€twice€by€the€time€he€wasÐ Ô$  Ðtwenty„five€years€old€reflects€on€his€maturity€when€he€married€his€high€school€sweetheart€whileÐ À  Ðstationed€overseas€in€the€Navy.€€However,€it€sheds€little€light€on€Mr.€Staggsððs€current€maturity€or€theÐ ¬ü  Ðstability€of€his€current€marriage.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àLikewise,€the€evidence€of€Mr.€Staggsððs€ð ðangerðð€is€anecdotal€and€unremarkable.€€It€appearsÐ pÀ Ðto€involve€only€two€circumstances.€€The€first€was€a€single€incident€when€Mr.€Staggs€purportedlyÐ \¬ Ðgrabbed€his€four„year„old€nephewððs€arm€and€yelled€at€him€while€placing€him€in€time€out.€€The€secondÐ H˜ Ðis€Ms.€Rayððs€observation€that€Mr.€Staggs€was,€at€times,€ð ðsternðð€with€her€two€older€children€whileÐ 4„ Ðthey€were€living€together€in€1997.€€These€incidents€are€not€evidence€of€a€continuing€course€ofÐ  p Ðconduct€that€reflects€on€Mr.€Staggsððs€ability€to€deal€with€small€children.€€These€incidents€are€deÐ  \ Ðminimis€and€are€certainly€not€inconsistent€with€the€conduct€one€might€expect€from€a€25„year„oldÐ øH Ðmale€finding€himself€in€a€predicament€like€the€one€in€which€Mr.€Staggs€found€himself€in€1997.€€TheÐ ä4 Ðpartiesðð€circumstances€in€1999€are€far€different€from€those€in€1997,€and€accordingly€Mr.€StaggsððsÐ Ð  Ðbehavior€in€1997€does€not€appear€to€be€an€accurate€predictor€of€his€behavior€in€1999€and€thereafter.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThe€evidence€presented€at€the€December€1999€hearing€regarding€Mr.€Staggs€does€not€clearlyÐ ”ä Ðand€convincingly€depict€a€person€who€would€be€an€unfit€parent.€€By€the€time€of€the€hearing,€Mr.Ð €Ð ÐStaggs€had€held€a€well„paying€job€for€over€eighteen€months€and€had€earned€the€trust€and€respect€ofÐ l¼ Ðhis€employer.€€He€also€been€married€to€a€woman€he€had€been€dating€for€approximately€eighteenÐ X ¨ Ðmonths,€and€he€had€been€fully€integrated€into€her€family.€€He€had€earned€the€admiration€and€respectÐ D!” Ðof€his€wifeððs€parents€for€his€honesty€and€tenacity.€€He€had€also€gained€experience€with€youngÐ 0"€  Ðchildren€and€was€serving€as€a€volunteer€coach€for€a€YMCA€youth€basketball€program.€€In€light€ofÐ #l! Ðthis€evidence,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€placed€undue€weight€on€Mr.€Staggsððs€past€conduct€ratherÐ $X" Ðthan€on€his€current€fitness€to€have€custody€of€his€children.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò4.ó óˆÐ Ì&"% Ðà@* * ìàò òMr.€Staggsððs€Relationship€With€Mr.€Rayó óˆÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà  àAs€a€final€matter,€the€trial€court€based€its€decision€that€Mr.€Staggs€is€unfit€to€have€custodyÐ )à$( Ðof€his€children€on€his€candid€admission€that€he€did€not€desire€Mr.€Ray€to€play€a€continuing€role€inÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€childrenððs€lives.€€The€trial€court€viewed€this€attitude€as€contrary€to€the€childrenððs€best€interests.€Ð h+¸&* ÐWhile€that€may€very€well€be€true,€Mr.€Staggsððs€attitude€is€not€unique€to€this€case.€€It€is€a€common,Ð T,¤'+ Ðalbeit€regrettable,€part€of€custody€disputes€not€only€between€a€biological€parent€and€a€third€party€butÐ ° Ðalso€between€biological€parents.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àNeither€Mr.€Ray€nor€Mr.€Staggs€attempted€to€conceal€their€dislike€for€each€other.€€TheirÐ tÄ Ðattitudes€most€likely€stem€from€their€competition€for€Ms.€Rayððs€favors€in€1997.€€Mr.€Ray,€renderedÐ `° Ða€cuckold€by€Mr.€Staggs,€carried€the€battle€to€his€wifeððs€lover€at€every€turn.€€After€the€trial€courtÐ L œ Ðpermitted€Mr.€Staggs€to€intervene€in€this€proceeding,€Mr.€Ray€vigorously€opposed€all€of€Mr.€StaggsððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðefforts€to€obtain€custody€and€even€visitation€with€the€twins.€€The€relations€between€the€two€menÐ $ t Ðbecame€so€strained€that€Mr.€Staggsððs€lawyer€and€father„in„law€advised€him€to€avoid€having€any€directÐ  ` Ðdealings€with€Mr.€Ray.€€Accordingly,€to€keep€tensions€in€check,€Mr.€Staggsððs€wife€dealt€with€Mr.€RayÐ ü L  Ðon€most€visitation€matters.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àOne€of€the€inevitable€consequences€of€a€custody€decision€is€that€the€custodial€parent€receivesÐ À  Ðcontrol€over€his€or€her€childrenððs€relationship€with€others.€€While€a€custodial€parent€cannot€interfereÐ ¬ü  Ðwith€a€childððs€relationship€with€his€or€her€other€biological€parent,€he€or€she€may€restrict€or€evenÐ ˜è  Ðprevent€third€parties,€even€grandparents€and€other€family€members,€from€maintaining€a€relationshipÐ „Ô  Ðwith€the€children.€€The€courts€cannot€interfere€or€abridge€this€custodial€prerogative€without€aÐ pÀ Ðcompelling€reason.€€òòSee€Nash„Putnam€v.€McCloudóó,€921€S.W.2d€at€175;€òòNale€v.€Robertsonóó,€871Ð \¬ ÐS.W.2d€at€678;€òòState€ex€rel.€Cihlar€v.€Crawfordóó,€39€S.W.3d€at€182.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àIn€cases€of€this€sort,€a€biological€parentððs€expressed€intention€regarding€how€he€or€she€intendsÐ  p Ðto€exercise€his€or€her€parental€prerogatives€is€relevant€to€the€question€of€custodial€fitness.€€However,Ð  \ Ðthese€intentions€take€on€controlling€significance€only€when€the€record€contains€evidence€thatÐ øH Ðexercising€the€parental€rights€in€the€intended€manner€will€cause€substantial€harm€to€the€child.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àMr.€Staggsððs€expressed€intention€to€deny€Mr.€Ray€continuing€visitation€with€the€childrenÐ ¼  Ðcould€conceivably€harm€the€children€in€two€ways.€€First,€the€children€might€be€emotionally€harmedÐ ¨ø Ðby€being€separated€from€the€most€significant€male€figure€they€have€had€in€their€young€lives.€€Second,Ð ”ä Ðthey€could€be€harmed€by€being€separated€from€their€siblings.€€We€can€only€speculate€about€theÐ €Ð Ðnature,€extent,€and€duration€of€the€harm€that€might€befall€the€twins€if€they€are€separated€from€Mr.Ð l¼ ÐRay€and€their€siblings€because€the€record€contains€no€evidence,€expert€or€otherwise,€regarding€whatÐ X ¨ Ðthe€possible€effects€of€placing€the€children€in€Mr.€Staggsððs€custody€might€be.€€As€a€general€matter,Ð D!” Ðclear€and€convincing€evidence€of€the€sort€of€psychological€harm€that€would€be€severe€enough€toÐ 0"€  Ðjustify€denying€custody€to€a€biological€parent€should€take€the€form€of€expert€testimony.€€Accordingly,Ð #l! Ðwe€conclude€that€the€present€record€lacks€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€children€will€beÐ $X" Ðsubstantially€harmed€if€Mr.€Staggs€decides€not€to€permit€Mr.€Ray€to€visit€them.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àSimilarly,€the€record€does€not€contain€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€twins€will€beÐ Ì&"% Ðsubstantially€harmed€if€they€are€separated€from€their€older€siblings.€€While€the€record€containsÐ ¸'#& Ðevidence€that€Ms.€Rayððs€four€children€have€bonded€and€that€they€get€along€well€with€each€other,€itÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcontains€no€evidence€regarding€the€reasonably€anticipated€effects€that€separating€the€children€mightÐ )à$( Ðâ âhave.€€To€influence€custody€decisions€in€cases€like€this€one,€the€presumption€against€separatingÐ |*Ì%) Ðsiblings׃"×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€will€not€suffice.€€Before€custody€can€be€denied€a€biological€parent€on€the€ground€thatÐ ° Ðâ âchildren€will€be€separated€from€their€half„siblings,€there€must€be€clear€and€convincing€evidence€thatÐ œì Ðthe€separation€will€cause€the€children€severe€psychological€harm.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àMr.€Staggs€has€not€said€that€he€will€not€permit€the€twins€to€continue€their€relationship€withÐ `° Ðtheir€older€half„sisters.€€Thus,€the€concerns€about€the€effects€of€separating€the€twins€from€theirÐ L œ Ðsiblings€can€be€addressed€by€fashioning€transitional€orders€and€visitation€orders€designed€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðminimize€the€impact€of€moving€the€children€from€one€environment€to€another€and€to€enable€theÐ $ t Ðchildren€to€continue€their€relationship€with€their€siblings.€€òòRice€v.€Riceóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€685Ð  ` Ð(permitting€the€use€of€visitation€orders€to€promote€the€continuation€of€the€relationship€between€half„Ð ü L  Ðsiblings).€€Neither€the€constitution€nor€common€sense€requires€that€the€transition€be€abrupt.Ð è 8  ÐAccordingly,€when€justified€by€the€facts,€courts€may€fashion€a€procedure€for€returning€children€toÐ Ô$  Ða€biological€parent€that€minimizes€the€harm€that€the€transition€itself€might€cause€to€the€child.€€TheseÐ À  Ðtransitional€arrangements€may€include€provisions€enabling€the€children€to€maintain€their€relationshipÐ ¬ü  Ðwith€their€siblings.׃#Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ˜è  ÐÌà@^^(ìàò òIII.ó óˆÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àWe€vacate€the€portions€of€the€January€12,€2000€and€April€3,€2000€orders€denying€Mr.Ð H˜ ÐStaggsððs€petition€for€custody€of€his€biological€children€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€withÐ 4„ Ðdirections€to€conduct€a€hearing€consistent€with€this€opinion€to€determine€whether€Mr.€Staggs€isÐ  p Ðcurrently€fit€to€have€custody€of€his€children€and€whether€granting€Mr.€Staggs€custody€will€expose€hisÐ  \ Ðchildren€to€substantial€harm.€€Pending€this€hearing,€the€trial€court€shall€prescribe€appropriateÐ øH Ðvisitation€for€Mr.€Staggs€and€his€children.€€The€costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€in€equal€proportions€toÐ ä4 ÐStephen€Eric€Staggs€and€his€surety€and€William€Martin€Ray€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€mayÐ Ð  Ðissue.Ð ¼  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________€Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE