WPC 0# UN %  0(w@74w 0l 0DR 0J 0Tb 0^ 0h 0r| 0| 0j 0 1u 0d AQY B 0D 0@ 0DK D/ U> B D3 B)L DCu AM U* &/ v~UvHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLJ(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ U g U g g U D D Ӏ n~<$, 3|x ((3$ !      0  (#$  0  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X !"#%C<< C d(3$ !  ("$    ($$   1  ''' dxd<  9p`(&Times New RomanP Pd 'dxd% Line 7 d))))7Border 1dd "*C << G<  9p`(Arial  !#d#&  !"  ,,   YYY FILED,X July29,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.,AppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . &    ` ` pX\RA'\ 7uGXXdd7 @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE,@ ATJACKSON @ _______________________________________________________ ) JOHANNATRAVIS , ) TiptonCountyChanceryCourt R+-*A1-j|o`  `@R ) No.14,862̀Plaintiff/Appellee. ) )VS. ) C.A.No.02A019707CH00163 ) MARTINL.TRAVIS , ) )̀Defendant/Appellant. ) )______________________________________________________________________________FromtheChanceryCourtofTiptonCountyatCovington. HonorableJ.StevenStafford,Chancellor J.ThomasCaldwell ,Ripley,TennesseeAttorneyforDefendant/Appellant. CyburnH.Sullivan ,Covington,Tennessee JamesH.Bradley ,Covington,TennesseeAttorneyforPlaintiff/Appellee.OPINIONFILED: REMANDED  FARMER,J. CRAWFORD,P.J.,W.S. :(Concurs) LILLARD,J. :(Concurs) Ӏ7U XXdXXd7рThisisadivorcecase.Theparties,MartinL.Travis(Husband)andJohannaTravis(Wife),marriedinFebruary1984,separatedinSeptember1995andweredivorcedbyfinaldecreeenteredinJune1997.Threechildrenwerebornofthemarriage:JoshuaDaniel,bornApril19,1985,AlexandriaFaith,bornAugust18,1987,andNicholasHunter,bornJanuary3,1993.Husbandhasappealedfromthefinaldecree,challengingthecorrectnessofthetrialcourtsdecisiontoawardsolecustodyofthechildrentoWife.Hehasalsoraisedadditionalissuesrelatingtothechildren.̛̜HusbandandWifewerechildhoodsweethearts,havingmetwhentheywereages7and6,respectively.Theyattendedhighschooltogetherandweremembersofthesamechurchwheretheyparticipatedinvariousyouthrelatedactivities.Theymarriedatages19and20.Therewereproblemsthroughoutthemarriage.Bothpartiestestifiedtoverbalabuseandphysicalaltercations,sometimesinthechildrenspresence.ItwasHusbandstestimonythatthephysicalabusewasinitiatedbyWifeandthatherespondedonlyinselfdefense.WifedescribedHusbandasdomineeringandcontrolling.Husbandtestifiedthatforthefirstsevenoreightyears,hisprioritiesweresomewhatamisswithhisattentionfocusedprimarilyonhisworkasopposedtohiswifeandchildren.Afteranaccidentresultinginthelossofhisjob,however,hestatedthathewasinapositiontospendmoretimewiththechildrenandwasconsequentlymadeawareoftheimportanceoffamilyandhassinceshiftedhispriorities.HusbandisintheprintingbusinessandatthetimeoftrialwasemployedasanestimatorforaprintingfirminJackson,Mississippi,earningapproximately$45,000annually.Wifewastheprimarycaretakerofthechildrenduringthemarriageandforatimealsooperatedaninhomedaycare,caringforupto25children.̀Neitherpartyhasresidedinthemaritalhome,locatedinCovington,sinceMay1996.WifetestifiedthatshemovedtoBartlettafterthecouplesseparationwhenherdaycarebusinessbegantodwindleandshewascaringforonlythreeorfourchildren.Atthetimeoftrial,WifeoperatedaninhomedaycarefromherresidenceinBartlett,caringforfourchildrenandearningbetween$300and$350perweek.ShecurrentlydatesaBartlettpoliceofficer,Mr.FrankLemmons. ThetestimonywasundisputedthatmuchanimosityexistsbetweenLemmonsandHusbandwhich,therecordindicates,hasaffectedthechildren,mostparticularlytheeldest,Joshua.ThetrialcourtconductedaninchambersconferencewithJoshuawhoindicatedapreferencethathiscustodybeawardedtoHusband.HusbandtestifiedthathewouldbewillingtorelocatetoTiptonCountyifsoorderedbythecourtinordertoobtaincustodyofthechildren.ThechildrenhavearelationshipwithboththeirmaternalandpaternalgrandparentsallofwhomliveintheCovingtonarea,aswellasothercousins,auntsanduncles. Thetrialcourtwaspresentedwiththedepositiontestimoniesofthreeclinicalpsychologists,onewhointerviewedthechildrenandWifeandrecommendedthatcustodybeplacedwithWife,onewhointerviewedthechildrenandHusbandandrecommendedthatcustodybeawardedHusbandandthefinalwhoofferednorecommendationtothecourtbutwhotestifiedasJoshuasindividualtherapistregardingtheimpactofthedivorceonhim.TherewasconflictingtestimonyamongthepsychologicalexpertsastowhetherWifesrelationshipwithLemmonshadnegativelyimpactedthechildren. Thefinaldecreeindicatesthepartiesstipulatedthatgroundsfordivorceexistedandthatbothpartiesweregrantedadivorcepursuanttostatute.Asheretoforenoted,thetrialcourtawardedcustodyofthechildrentoWife,withHusbandreceiving standardvisitationprivilegesaspreviouslyagreedbytheparties.Husbandwasorderedtopaymonthlychildsupport.ThedecreeinstructedthatWifewastoavoidanycontactbetweenLemmonsandHusbandregardingthechildren;thatanydiscussionsinvolvingthechildrenswelfareweretobeconductedbetweentheparties;andthatalldisciplineofanytypetothechildrenwastobeadministeredbythepartiesonly.Finally,thedecreeorderedthepartiestocontinueJoshuascounselingsessionswithDr.AllenBattle onanasneededbasisuntilsuchtimeasDr.BattledischargesJoshuaoruntilthecourtordersotherwise. Inamemorandumopinion,thetrialcourtmadethefollowingfactualfindingsastheyrelatetochildcustody:8 WifeiscurrentlydatingamannamedFrankLemmons....SheadmitsthatsheishavingsexualrelationswithMr.Lemmonsbutdeniesdoinganythinginappropriateinthepresenceofthechildren.TheHusbandclaimsthattheWifeisattemptingtohaveMr.Lemmonstakehisplaceinthelivesofthechildren.TheWifedeniesthis.TheHusbandandMr.Lemmonshavehadverbalconfrontationsinthepresenceofthechildren.8  FrankLemmonstestifiedonbehalfofWife.HestatedthathelovedtheWifeandheandtheWifehaddonenothinginappropriateinthepresenceofthechildren.HealsodeniedspendingthenightattheWifeshomewhilethechildrenwerepresent.8  Mr.LemmonsdeniedthathehaddoneanythingtoimpairthechildrensrelationshipwiththeHusband.Heclaimstodoalotofthingswiththechildren.HealsotestifiedthathewillalwaysdisliketheHusbandanddoesnotbelievethathewilleverbeabletoresolvethatproblem.8  UponrequestoftheHusband,theCourtinterviewedthepartiesoldestchild,Joshua,inthepresenceofthepartiesattorneys.TheCourtfoundJoshuatobeaveryintelligentchildwholovedbothhisparents.Heisextremelyconcernedwiththisdivorceandtheadverseaffectthatithashadonhimandhissiblings.Healsostatedthathisgradeshavegonedownsincethefilingofthedivorce.Joshuatestifiedthatitwouldbehispreferencetolivewithhisfather.8  TheWifetestifiedthatthepartiescannotdiscussanythingcivillyandareunabletoagreeonanyissues.Thishasresultedinthepartiesexperiencinggreatdifficultyregardingthechildrensincetheirseparation. Basedupontheevidencebeforeit,thecourtconcluded:8  TheCourtistroubledwithvariousaspectsofbothpartieslives.However,ithasnodoubtthatbothpartieslovethechildrenandintheirownway,seekwhattheybelievetobebestforthechildren.8  TheHusbandhasadmittedthattheWifeisagoodmother.However,hisconcern,aswellastheconcernoftheCourt,involvestheWifesrelationshipwithMr.Lemmons.Additionally,theCourtistroubledwiththelackofsuccessthatJoshuahasexperiencedinhisschoolworksincetheseparation.8  Ontheotherhand,theCourtisconcernedwiththecontrolthattheHusbandseemstowanttoassertinallissues.TheCourtisalsoconcernedbytheallegationsofphysicalabuseandwiththeHusbandsinexplicablebehaviorexhibitedtowardtheWifeduringvariousarguments.8  TheCourtdoesnotbelievethatthechildrenshouldbeseparatedbutthattheyshouldremaintogether.TheCourtalsodoesnotbelievethatitwouldbeinthechildrensbestintereststomovetoJackson,Mississippi. Afterentryofthedecree,HusbandfiledamotionforadditionalfindingsrequestingthatthecourtenteranorderallowinghimtotaketwoofthechildrenasdependentsforincometaxpurposesandrequiringthepartiestosharetravelexpensesrelatingtovisitationbyinstructingthattheyexchangethechildrenataconvenientlocationhalfwaybetweenJackson,MississippiandCovington.ThetrialcourtsubsequentlydeniedHusbandsrequestforasharingoftravelexpenses,butorderedthathebeallowedtotaketheyoungestchildasadependentforincometaxpurposes. Husbandpresentsthefollowingissuesonappeal:8  I.TheCourterredinawardingcustodyoftheparties[]threechildrentothewife.8  II.TheCourterredinfailingtorequirethepartiestojointlysharethechildrenstransportationexpenses.8  III.TheCourterredinfailingtoallowtheHusbandtwo(2)ofthechildrenasdependentsforincometaxpurposes. Wefirstaddresstheissueofchildcustody.OurprimaryconcernisthebestinterestsoftheTravischildren.ThestandardofreviewisinaccordancewithRule13(d)T.R.A.P.whichprovidesfora denovo reviewaccompaniedbyapresumptionofcorrectnessofthetrialcourtsfindingsoffact,unlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise. E.g.,Whitakerv.Whitaker ,957S.W.2d834,838(Tenn.App.1997). Weareguidedinourdecisionbycertainguidelinespreviouslyestablishedbycaselawaswellasthosefactorssetforthbystatute.Theseaidesinmakingourdeterminationwereaddressedbythecourtin Whitaker asfollows:8 Inchildcustodyandvisitationcases,thewelfareandbestinterestsofachildaretheparamountconsiderationsandtherights,desires,andinterestsoftheparentsbecomesecondary. Neelyv.Neely , 737S.W.2d539,542(Tenn.App.1987).In Bahv.Bah ,668S.W.2d663(Tenn.App.1983),theCourtestablishedsomeguidelinesformakingthedeterminationofbestinterest:8 8  Weadoptwhatwebelieveisacommonsenseapproachtocustody,onewhichwewillcallthedoctrineof comparativefitness.Theparamountconcerninchildcustodycasesisthewelfareandbestinterestofthechild. Mollishv.Mollish ,494S.W.2d145,151(Tenn.App.1972).Thereareliterallythousandsofthingsthatmustbetakenintoconsiderationinthelivesofyoungchildren, Smithv.Smith ,188Tenn.430,437,220S.W.2d627,630(1949),andthesefactorsmustbereviewedonacomparativeapproach:8 8 8  Fitnessforcustodialresponsibilitiesislargelyacomparativematter.Nohumanbeingisdeemedperfect,hencenohumancanbedeemedaperfectlyfitcustodian.Necessarily,therefore,thecourtsmustdeterminewhichoftwoormoreavailablecustodiansismoreorlessfitthanothers.8 8  Edwardsv.Edwards ,501S.W.2d283,29091(Tenn.App.1973)(emphasissupplied).8  Bah ,668S.W.2dat666.8  ThetrialcourtmustalsoconsiderthefactorsassetforthinT.C.A.366106(1996):8 8 366106.Childcustody. Inasuitforannulment,divorce,separatemaintenance,orinanyotherproceedingrequiringthecourttomakeacustodydeterminationregardingaminorchild,suchdeterminationshallbemadeuponthebasisofthebestinterestofthechild.Thecourtshallconsiderallrelevantfactorsincludingthefollowingwhereapplicable:8 8 8 (1)Thelove,affectionandemotionaltiesexistingbetweentheparentsandchild;8 8 8 (2)Thedispositionoftheparentstoprovidethechildwithfood,clothing,medicalcare,educationandothernecessarycareandthedegreetowhichaparenthasbeentheprimarycaregiver;8 8 8 (3)Theimportanceofcontinuityinthechildslifeandthelengthoftimethechildhaslivedinastable,satisfactoryenvironment;8 8 8 (4)Thestabilityofthefamilyunitoftheparents;8 8 8 (5)Thementalandphysicalhealthoftheparents;8 8 8 (6)Thehome,schoolandcommunityrecordofthechild;8 8 8 (7)Thereasonablepreferenceofthechildiftwelve(12)yearsofageorolder.Thecourtmayhearthepreferenceofayoungerchilduponrequest.Thepreferencesofolderchildrenshouldnormallybegivengreaterweightthanthoseofyoungerchildren;8 8 8 (8)Evidenceofphysicaloremotionalabusetothechild,totheotherparentortoanyotherperson;and8 8 8 (9)Thecharacterandbehaviorofanyotherpersonwhoresidesinorfrequentsthehomeofaparentandsuchpersonsinteractionswiththechild. Whitaker ,957S.W.2dat83738. Asheretoforenoted,therecordbeforeusindicatesthatthetwooldestTravischildren,AlexandriaandJoshua,ages9and12respectively,atthetimeoftrial,werebothinterviewedbyclinicalpsychologistsregardingtheimpacttheirparentsdivorcehashadonthem.Fromthepsychologicalreports,aswellasthetestimoniesoftheparties,weconcludethatAlexandriaiscopingsufficientlywithherparentsestrangement,dueinsomedegreetothefactthatherolderbrotherservesassortofa bufferbetweenherandthefamilysituation.Dr.BattletestifiedthatAlexandriais doingquitewellandisnotexhibitinganypsychologicalproblemsotherthanthosenormallyexpectedofanychildwhoseparentsareinthethroesofadivorce.Nordoestherecordreflectanyunusualorsignificantadjustmentproblemsfortheyoungestchild,althoughhewasnotinterviewedpsychologicallyduetohisage.Therecord,however,doessuggestthatJoshuahasbeenseverelyimpactedbythedivorceandhasenduredmuchemotionalturmoilasaresult.TherewastestimonyintherecordthatMothersemploymentintheCovingtonarea,runningachildrensdaycare,wasnolongerfeasibleafterthepartiesseparationbecausechildrenweretakenoutofthedaycare.However,insteadofseekingemploymentintheareainwhichthechildrenhadgrownupandtheareainwhichtheirextendedfamilywaslocated,MothermovedthechildrentotheBartlettarea,nearMr.Lemons,andremainedunemployedforasignificantperiodoftime.Thereisnothingintherecordindicatingthatthismovewasinthebestinterestofthechildren;indeed,therecordindicatesthatthemovecreatedmoreturmoilforchildrenalreadycaughtbetweentwoparentsinconflict.TherecordalsoindicatesthatMr.Lemmonsdisciplinedthechildrenby whippingthem.Ontheotherhand,Dr.StaceyL.DixontestifiedthatAlexandriadivulgedtoherthatherfather doesntgivememyasthmamedicineand whenIcoughitdriveshimcrazyandheslapsmeonmyface.ShealsotoldDr.Dixonthatherfatherdoesnottakehertothedoctorwhensheissickwhensheiswithhim.WedonotfindtheevidencetopreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsgrantofcustodyofAlexandriaandNicholastomother. Dr.Battle,Joshuastherapist,testifiedthatJoshuaexhibited extremeconcernabouttheangerthatexistsbetweenmotherandfather....anxietyandsadnessthatisevokedbythedisruptionofhishomeandhisfamily....graveconcernabouthismotherhavinganaffairwithanotherman....[and]thedesiretolivewithhisfatherwhileatthesametimehefeelsfrustratedindoingsoandfearfulthathewont[be]abletoo.Dr.Battlecontinued:8  InJoshuaIjustseehiminessenceinastateoftransition.Inotherwords,hehasnotsolidifiedintoanything.Itissimplysortofpsychologicalupheaval,asthoughonehadacontainerofwaterinwhichthedirthassettledoutofthebottomsoyouhaveclearwateratthetopanddirtatthebottom,andsomeonecomesinwithastickandstirsthewholethingupandtheneverythingisjusttopsyturvy,butthereisnoresolutioninJoshuasmindatthispointexceptinsofarashedecidedasofthelasttimeIsawhimandevenindeedbeforethenthathewouldratherlivewithhisfatherbecausethatwouldbemoreinkeepingwiththegoalsandthevaluesthathehasbeentaught.Dr.BattlebelievedJoshuahadbeen psychologicallydisturbed,butbelievedanydamagedonecouldbehealedwithfurthertherapy.HebelievedAlexandriahadfairedbetterduringthisfamilytraumaduetoherageandthefactthatJoshua,herolderbrother,hadcreatedacertaindegreeofsecurityforher.Dr.BattledidnotfindJoshuatoexhibitany deeppsychopathologyandbelievedhisdisorderenvironmentallyproduced.HeconcludedthatJoshuahad sufficientintelligence,graspofthesituationandofhimselftobeeminentlycapabletomakeaninformeddecision.AndIfindthathisreasonsforlivingwithhisfatherarenotsilly,trivial,childishreasonsthatmightbegivenbyachildforthebenefitoftheirowngratification....WhenquestionedastotheeffectonJoshuaifcustodywasdividedandhewasraisedapartfromhistwosiblings,Battleresponded, [o]nedoesnotliketohavethatdivisionofsiblingsunderconditionswhereeverythingelseisequal.Battlesaidthiswasparticularlythecaseifthechildrenweretoberaisedhundredsofmilesapart. Duringtheinchambersconference,JoshuainformedthecourtthathedidnotliketheschoolthathetransferredtoinBartlettaswellastheoneheattendedinCovingtonandthathedidnt knowifitsjustbecauseofthisdivorce,IvebeenmakingFs,anditsnotgreat.Whenaskedwhetherhelookedoutforhislittlebrotherandsister,hereplied Ikeeptheminthecornerofmyeyeallthetime.Hestatedthatifhe hadachoice,hewould probablywant[heandhissiblings]tolivewith[his]dad....Iwouldjustlikethatbetter,Iwouldthink.Whenaskediftherewas [a]nyparticularreasonforhischoice,Joshuaexplainedthat someofitisFrank.Hestated, everytimemydaddropsusoff,[athismothers,aftervisiting],[Franks]gottocarryonsomething.JoshuasaidthatFrankwasalwayscallinghisdadbadnames.HerelatedanincidentwhereHusbandhadreturnedthechildrentoWifeshouseaftervisiting.Lemmonswaspresentand startedcalling[his]dadnames.Hecontinued, [m]ysisterthrewdownhershoesandjumpedinmydadsarms,andmybrotherwasclingingontohislegsuntilmymomcameoutthere,andshetoldmydadtoletgo....Mysisterwouldntletgo.Itwasjusthard.Joshuasaidhesometimesworriedabouthismotherandfatherandwas alwaysconcernedabouthisbrotherandsisterandfeltasthoughhehadtotakecareofthem.JoshuasaidthatLemmonsdisciplinedhimandhissiblingsbyspankingthem.HepreferreditwhenLemmonswasnotpresentathismomshome. Werecognizethatdividedcustodyarrangementsgenerallydonotservethebestinterestsofthechildrenandthat,ifatallpossible,decisionsregardingcustodyshouldbemadesoastoavoidthisparticularresultforchildrenwhodeservenolessthanotherchildrenwhoseparentsremainunited.AsstatedinW.WaltonGarrett, TennesseeDivorce,AlimonyandChildCustody 2415(1997), [t]hereisastrongpresumptionthatthewelfareofthechildrenwillbebestservedbykeepingthechildrentogether.Thispresumption,however,istobe viewedinlightoftheparticularfactsandcircumstancessurroundingeachchildcustodycase. Hollisv.Hollis ,No.01A019704CH00178,1998WL57537(Tenn.App.Feb.13,1998). WearecognizantofthefactthatJoshuaspreferenceisnotbinding,butisoneofthefactorstobeconsideredinacustodydetermination. Smithv.Smith ,No.01A019511CH00536,1996WL526921(Tenn.App.Sept.18,1996); Hardinv.Hardin ,No.03A019711GS00507,(Tenn.App.May19,1998).GiventherelationshipbetweenJoshuaandMr.LemmonsandbetweenJoshuaandhisfather,wefindittobeaparticularlysignificantfactorinthiscase.Havingreviewedthisrecord,wefindthatthereisstrongevidenceinfavorofFatherbeingawardedcustodyofJoshua.However,ourcarefulreviewofthechancellorsdiscussionwithJoshuaconvincesusthatJoshuasexpressedpreferencetolivewithhisfatherwasbasedonJoshuasassumptionthatcustodyofallthechildrenwouldbeawardedtofather.Aspreviouslydiscussed,thechildrenareverycloseandJoshuafeelsprotectivetowardhisyoungersiblings.Wedonotbelieveheenvisionedthembeingseparated.Therefore,weconcludethatthiscaseshouldberemandedtoallowJoshuatoexpresstothetrialcourtwhetherhispreferencewouldbethesameifheandhissiblingsareseparated.Therecordbeforeusdoesnotcontainevidenceoftheeffectofsplitcustodyonthechildrenandwhetherornotitwouldbeintheirbestinterest.Therefore,weareoftheopinionthatthiscaseberemandedtothetrialcourttoconductafurtherhearingontheissueofcustodypursuanttoT.C.A.273128andtoconsiderallfactorsconcerningcustodyofthesechildren.Thetrialcourtshallalsomakeanyfurtherdeterminationsconcerningchildsupport,visitationandtheallocationoftaxdeductionsasthecircumstancesrequire. WecommendthetrialcourtforincludinginthefinaldecreethatWifeistoavoidanycontactbetweenMr.FrankLemmonsandHusbandregardingthechildrenandthatalldisciplineofanytypetothechildrenbeadministeredonlybyHusbandorWife. Inviewofourremand,thesecondissuepresentedbyHusbandispretermitted.CostsofthisappealaretaxedtoMr.Travis.      ____________________________________      FARMER,J.______________________________CRAWFORD,P.J.,W.S.(Concurs)______________________________LILLARD,J.(Concurs)