’WPCĮ …# VUNa %Æ 0(µw@Ż4 1 @ 0lH 0D“ 0Jų 0TB 0^– 0hō 0r\ 0|Ī 0†J 0Š 1u` 0dÕ U>9 BwB)”DC½ AMU*MŽwUv~X D3ÖvÓ  0@Ü AOĘk 0D1 D/u B¤˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTČŚŲŚŚŲČŚ0nLHĪ(ČhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($”” ĘEĒČEÉŹEĖĢEĶĪӀŲDŅ 3|xŲ((3üŻ$¤¤Ż ƒ!ŻŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó2 ’’0Indent1Ō2ŌŌ3  Ō2" ’’0Indent2ą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2, ’’0Indent3ą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō26 ’’0Indent4ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2@ ’’0Indent5ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2J ’’0Indent6ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2T ’’0Indent7ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2^ ’’0Indent8ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō ’’?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ’’8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd€-$Cž’ << G’’< Œ 9p`(Arial ŌŻ ƒ!ŻŌ€!ŌŻ  ŻŌ€&ŌŌ€&ŌÓ  Óņ ņŌ YYY ŌFILEDŌ€&XŌĢĢMay€23,€1997ĢĢCecil€W.€CrowsonĢAppellate€Court€ClerkŌ  Ōó ó łŻ ƒ!ŻŃ#€d#ŃŌ€!ŌŻ  ŻŻ ƒ $Żą ąņņŚ  ŚŚ  ŚóóŻ  ŻOne€of€the€changes€found€by€the€trial€court€was€š š[t]he€improvement€in€Mr.€Williamsšš€jobĻstability€since€the€divorce.šš€€This€finding€is€puzzling€in€light€of€Mr.€Williamsšš€testimony€in€the€firstĻhearing€that€he€had€held€eleven€job€positions€since€the€divorce,€and€his€testimony€at€the€secondĻhearing€that€he€had€changed€jobs€since€the€first€hearing.ĢPtPtHHŚ(’į’āłFG(üHHŚ(d'h""""'’’dxdStyl{WP}01•ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆŠ ŠŠHHŠŠ  ŠŠ2ŠŠ’’øę$’ŠŠHHŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ  ŠŠ ŠŠ ŠŃŃŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŃ € ŃŃ<Px–ČŃŅŅŅ443!#4ŅŅ$ *$ŅŅ$*$ŅŅ ’KK ŅŅ  Geneva ŅŅ  Geneva ŅÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŅ  h HD: Geneva ŅŅ  h HD: Geneva Ņ("’’$££Ņ  ŅŅ  Ņ€-‚ƒCž’<< C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó ó„„'÷’ dxdü’P PdŻ ƒ!ŻŌ . ŌŌ€!ŌŻ  Żņ ņŃ\R AŲ'\ŃŃ\R AŲ'\Ń›Ž ŽĢą@ ąIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óĢņ ņą@ ąWESTERN€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEĢą ąą ąą ąņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ĢĢóóĢĢCONNIE€A.€WILLIAMS,€€€ą ąą ą)ą ąĢ(Now€Montgomery)ą ąą ąą ąą ą)ó óĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņ)ó óĢ€€Respondent/Counter„Petitioner/Appellantņ ņą ą)ą ąó óPutnam€Circuit€No.€NJ„3698Ģņ ņą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ó óą ąą ąĢņ ņą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)Ģvs.ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ą€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąó óAppeal€No.€01A01„9610„CV„00468ņ ņĢMICHAEL€C.€WILLIAMS,€ą ąą ą)̜Ł€€ŁßR€%'$A1-j|ąČ` ē `€€@’Rߛą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)Ģó óPetitioner/Counter„Respondent/Appellee.ņ ņą ą)ą ąĢņņó óĢņ ņóóĢ€€€ĢĢĢą@ ąó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€PUTNAM€COUNTYĢą@ ąAT€COOKEVILLE,€TENNESSEEĢĢĢĢą@ ąTHE€HONORABLE€JOHN€A.€TURNBULL,€JUDGEĢņņĢĢĢFor€the€Respondent/Counter„Petitioner/ą ąFor€the€Petitioner/Counter„Respondent/ĢAppellantóó:ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņņAppelleeóó:ņņĢóóĢRankin€P.€Bennettą ąą ąą ąą ąCraig€P.€Fickling€€€€€€€€ĢCookeville,€Tennesseeą ąą ą€€€€€€€€€€€€Cookeville,€TennesseeĢĢņ ņĢĢĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąREVERSED€IN€PART,€AFFIRMED€INĻPART€ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąAND€REMANDED€ĢĢĢĢĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąó óHOLLY€œKIRBY€LILLARD,›€J.ĢĢĢ̜CONCURS:›ĢņņœĢóóALAN€E.€HIGHERS,›€J.Ģ̜DISSENTS€IN€PART,€CONCURS€IN€RESULT:›ĢœĢBEN›€H.€œCANTRELL,›€J.ĒŲŲŁ  ŁÓÓŃ7€w6XXdģXXdģ7ŃŃ  Ńą@ ąņ ņOPINIONó óĢÓ  Óą ąą ąThis€is€a€child€custody€case.€€In€1991,€the€parties€divorced€pursuant€to€a€maritalĻdissolution€agreement.€€Under€the€agreement,€the€mother,€Connie€A.€Montgomery€(formerlyϜWilliams),›€was€awarded€custody€of€the€partiesšš€sons,€with€visitation€to€the€father,€Michael€C.ĻWilliams.€€Subsequently,€Mr.€Williams€filed€a€petition€for€change€of€custody,€which€was€grantedĻby€the€trial€court.€€We€find€insufficient€change€of€circumstances€to€justify€a€change€of€custody€andĻreverse€the€decision€of€the€trial€court.Ģą ąIn€1991,€the€parties€entered€into€a€Marital€Dissolution€and€Child€Custody€AgreementĻ(š šAgreementšš),€which€was€incorporated€into€the€Final€Decree€of€divorce.€€Under€the€Agreement,ĻConnie€Montgomery€(š šMotheršš)€was€awarded€custody€of€the€partiesšš€twin€sons,€Ross€and€Ryan,Ļwith€visitation€to€Michael€C.€Williams€(š šFatheršš).€€Father€was€required€to€pay€child€supportĻbiweekly€to€Mother.Ģą ąThe€Final€Decree€also€incorporated€an€Order€of€Protection,€under€which€it€was€determinedĻthat€Mother€had€proven€allegations€of€physical€abuse.€€Prior€to€the€divorce,€Mother€had€filed€aĻpetition€for€a€protective€order,€alleging€that€Father€had€pulled€a€gun€on€her€and€had€been€physicallyĻabusive€toward€her€when€he€drank€alcohol.€€€The€Order€of€Protection€enjoined€Father€from€furtherĻacts€of€violence€toward€Mother.Ģą ąSubsequently,€Father€became€in€arrears€on€his€obligation€to€pay€child€support,€with€theĻarrearage€eventually€totaling€$6,894.49.€€An€advance€notice€of€income€assignment€for€payment€ofĻthe€delinquency€was€filed€in€October,€1993.€€In€December,€1993,€Father€filed€a€petition€for€changeĻin€custody,€also€seeking€a€cessation€of€his€child€support€obligation,€stating€that€he€had€remarriedĻand€alleging€a€material€change€in€circumstances.€€Mother€filed€an€answer€and€counter„petition,Ļalleging€Father€had€unclean€hands€due€to€his€failure€to€pay€child€support€and€seeking€a€finding€ofĻcontempt€against€Father€on€that€basis.€€In€February,€1994,€the€trial€court€entered€an€agreed€order€ofĻincome€assignment€for€payment€of€the€arrearage,€with€a€ten„day€jail€sentence€stayed€uponĻcompliance€with€the€Order€to€pay€the€arrearage€and€the€continuing€child€support€payments.€Ģą ąTwo€hearings€were€held€on€Fatherššs€petition€to€change€custody.€€The€partiesšš€sons€wereĶtwelve€years€old€at€the€time.€€At€the€first€hearing,€Father€testified€that€the€boys€had€expressedĻhostility€toward€Motherššs€boyfriend,€Mr.€Kenny€Maynard.€€Father€introduced€into€evidence€twoĻnotes€by€the€boys€referring€to€š šhiring€a€hit€manšš€to€kill€Mr.€Maynard,€and€another€note€referring€toĻMr.€Maynardššs€drinking€š šBartels€and€Jamesšš€wine€coolers€at€Motherššs€house.€€Father€testified€that,Ļwhile€visiting€Fatherššs€home,€the€boys,€in€playing€with€toy€soldiers€and€guns,€had€œsaid,›€š šDeath€toĻKenny.šš€€Father€also€testified€that€the€boys€had€called€him€from€Motherššs€home€and€told€him€thatĻthey€were€under€a€bed€in€their€room€because€they€did€not€want€Mr.€Maynard€to€hear€them€talking€toĻFather.€€He€stated€that€the€boys€had€complained€of€Mr.€Maynardššs€smoking€and€drinking€in€theirĻpresence.€€Father€testified€that€all€of€these€incidents€had€occurred€over€a€period€of€approximatelyĻtwo€years.€€Ģą ąOn€cross„examination,€Father€denied€being€in€arrears€on€his€child€support€obligation,Ļdenied€physically€abusing€Mother,€denied€that€Mother€obtained€an€Order€of€Protection€from€suchĻabuse,€and€acknowledged€that€he€had€worked€at€eleven€different€places€of€employment€since€theĻpartiesšš€divorce.€€Father€testified€that€his€current€wife€had€stayed€overnight€at€his€home€prior€toĻtheir€marriage€while€the€partiesšš€sons€were€present.€€He€acknowledged€drinking€alcohol€after€theĻdivorce€but€said€he€had€quit€three€years€earlier.€€He€stated€that€he€had€smoked€until€eight€monthsĻprior€to€the€hearing.Ģą ąFather€then€submitted€the€testimony€of€his€expert€psychologist,€Dr.€Roy€Bilbrey.€€Dr.ĻBilbrey€did€not€treat€the€partiesšš€sons,€but€interviewed€them€on€several€occasions€at€FatherššsĻrequest.€€€Dr.€Bilbrey€described€expressions€of€hostility€toward€Mr.€Maynard€similar€to€thoseĻdescribed€by€Father,€including€the€boysšš€stated€belief€that€Mr.€Maynard€had€killed€their€cat.€€Dr.ĻBilbrey€testified€that€one€twin€had€told€him€that€he€wanted€to€live€with€Father€and€the€other€had€toldĻhim€he€did€not€want€to€change€the€current€arrangement,€with€Mother€having€custody.€€FatherššsĻcurrent€wife,€Donnia€Williams,€testified€that€she€had€a€good€relationship€with€the€partiesšš€sons€andĻdescribed€their€activities€together.€€She€stated€that€the€boys€had€told€her€that€they€wanted€to€liveĻwith€her€and€Father.€Ģą ąMother€testified€that€she€had€been€the€boysšš€primary€œcaregiver›€for€twelve€years,€since€theirĻbirth.€€She€testified€that€she€œhad€been›€employed€operating€machinery€at€Tutco€for€twenty„twoĻyears,€and€that€she€had€been€primarily€responsible€for€providing€for€the€boysšš€needs.€€SheĻindicated€that€Father€had€periodically€been€in€arrears€on€his€obligation€to€pay€child€support,€and€onĻone€occasion€failed€to€pay€any€child€support€for€a€period€of€a€year€and€a€half.€€During€this€time,€sheĻtestified,€she€worked€two€additional€jobs,€a€total€of€sixty€to€sixty„five€hours€per€week,€to€provideĻfor€the€boysšš€needs.Ģą ąMother€testified€further€of€her€extensive€involvement€with€the€boysšš€schoolwork€andĻextracurricular€activities.€€She€indicated€that€Father€rarely€participated€in€such€activities.€€SheĻtestified€that,€prior€to€the€partiesšš€divorce,€Father€had€physically€abused€her€in€the€childrenššsĻpresence€and€œthat€that›€was€the€reason€she€obtained€the€Order€of€Protection€that€was€incorporatedĻinto€the€€divorce€decree.Ģą ąMother€testified€that€she€dated€Kenny€Maynard€and€that€he€visited€her€home,€but€had€neverĻspent€the€night€there€while€the€children€were€present.€€She€stated€that€he€did€not€drink€alcohol€inĻfront€of€the€children€and€that€he€had€a€good€relationship€with€the€boys.€€She€said€that€Mr.€MaynardĻhad€taken€the€boys€to€extracurricular€activities€and€sports€events.€€Mother€stated€that€the€boys€hadĻnever€indicated€any€hostility€toward€Mr.€Maynard,€had€never€indicated€a€belief€that€Mr.€MaynardĻkilled€their€cat,€and€had€never€told€her€that€they€wanted€to€live€with€Father.€€She€testified€that€one€ofĻthe€twins€had€said€that€he€had€stomachaches€while€at€Fatherššs€home€and€that€the€other€twinššsĻgrades€had€fallen€since€Father€filed€his€petition€to€obtain€custody.Ģą ąMr.€€Maynard€stated€in€his€testimony€that€he€had€worked€as€a€truck€driver€for€Genco€for€tenĻyears.€€He€testified€that€he€had€dated€Mother€for€three€years€and€had€never€stayed€overnight€at€herĻhome€while€the€children€were€present.€€He€stated€that€he€had€a€good€relationship€with€the€boys€andĻdescribed€extracurricular€and€sports€activities€he€had€participated€in€with€them.€€He€testified€that€heĻdid€not€discipline€the€twins,€œthat€that›€was€their€motherššs€job.€€He€denied€injuring€the€boysšš€pet.€€HeĻacknowledged€that€he€had€smoked€but€said€that€he€quit€two€years€prior€to€the€hearing.€€He€indicatedĶthat€he€had€shot€a€pistol€in€Motherššs€back€yard€on€one€occasion.€€Mr.€Maynard€testified€that€he€hadĻasked€Mother€to€marry€him€but€that€she€had€refused€because€she€had€promised€her€sons€that€sheĻwould€not€remarry,€due€to€their€fear€œthat›€a€new€husband€would€hurt€her€as€Father€had€done.Ģą ąThe€trial€judge€then€interviewed€the€partiesšš€sons€in€chambers.€The€boys€indicated€that€theyĻlove€both€of€their€parents.€€They€described€both€Donnia€Williams€and€Kenny€Maynard€as€š šniceššĻand€stated€that€they€got€along€well€with€both€of€them.€€They€acknowledged€writing€two€notesĻexpressing€hostility€toward€Mr.€Maynard€and€said€they€did€it€because€they€were€š šmadšš€at€Mr.ĻMaynard.€€They€said€they€had€seen€Mr.€Maynard€drink€a€beer€while€barbecuing€outside.€€TheyĻdenied€believing€that€someone€had€injured€their€cat,€but€Ross€acknowledged€that€he€had€toldϜFatherššs›€expert,€Dr.€Bilbrey,€œĒthat›€he€thought€Mr.€Maynard€had€killed€it.€€Ryan€told€the€trial€judge€that€he€had€stomachaches€atĻFatherššs€house€more€often€than€at€Motherššs€house.Ģą ąThe€trial€judge€then€told€the€parties€that€he€wanted€their€sons€to€be€evaluated€by€theirĻtreating€psychologist,€Dr.€John€Averitt,€and€that€he€wanted€Dr.€Averitt€to€report€to€the€court,Ļparticularly€about€the€boysšš€notes€regarding€Mr.€Maynard.Ģą ąDr.€Averitt€had€been€referred€to€treat€the€boys€by€their€pediatrician.€€In€his€depositionĻsubmitted€to€the€trial€court,€Dr.€Averitt€testified€that€he€had€previously€treated€the€boys€for€anxietyĻsymptoms€that€appeared€after€Father€initiated€proceedings€to€obtain€custody.€€He€stated€that€bothĻboys€were€stressed€by€their€parentsšš€conflict€and€did€not€want€to€upset€or€disappoint€either€parent.€ĻHe€testified€that€both€boys€told€him€that€they€were€š šhappy€with€the€arrangements€as€they€werešš€and€Ļš šwanted€to€be€with€their€mother.šš€€Ģą ąIn€his€report€to€the€trial€court,€Dr.€Averitt€said€that€the€twins€resisted€admitting€that€they€hadĻwritten€the€notes€about€Mr.€Maynard,€feeling€that€they€had€done€something€š švery€wrong.šš€€TheyĻdenied€that€anyone€had€coached€them€in€advance€about€the€session€with€Dr.€Averitt.€€The€reportĻstated:ĢÓÓą8 ąą ąThe€boys€both€indicated€that€they€like€Donna€[sic]€and€Kenny.€€Both€deniedĻfearing€Donna€[sic]€or€Kenny.€€Ryan€said€that€š šRoss€got€mad€at€Kenny€one€nightĻbecause€he€was€arguing€with€momma.šš€€He€denied€that€Kenny€hit€his€mother.€€HeĻalso€noted€that€the€argument€happened€š ša€long€time€ago.ššĢĢą8 ąą ąRyan€said,€š šMy€cat€got€ran€over,€and€Ross€said€that€Kenny€killed€it.šš€€I€wasĻmad€at€Kenny€then.€€Ross€said€that€he€was€œjust,›€š škiddingšš€when€he€said€that€KennyĻkilled€the€cat.ĢĢą8 ąą ąRyan€said€that€the€notes€written€by€Ross€(exhibit€1)€were€written,€š ša€longĻtime€ago.šš€€Ryan€said,€š šRoss€left€them€laying€around€and€Dad€found€them.šš€€HeĻsaid€that€Dad€š šwas€happyšš€when€he€found€them.€€He€noted€that€it€seemed€to€pleaseĻhis€father€to€know€they€were€mad€at€Kenny.ĢĢą8 ąą ąI€asked€them€if€they€had€talked€with€anyone€about€these€notes.€€Ross€said,Ļš šWe€talked€to€Bilbrey.šš€€I€assume€they€referred€to€Roy€Bilbrey,€Ph.D.€€I€askedĻthem€whey€[sic]€they€told€Dr.€Bilbrey.€€Ryan€said€they€told€him€they€wanted€to€liveĻwith€their€Dad,€and€that€they€were€mad€at€Kenny.ĢĢą8 ąą ąI€asked€them€if€they€told€Dr.€Bilbrey€the€truth.€€Each€boy€said€that€theyĻwanted€to€š škeep€things€as€they€are.šš€€Ryan€said,€š šI€donššt€hate€Kenny.šš€€Ross€said,Ķš šNo€we€donššt€hate€him.šš€€I€asked€if€they€fear€Kenny.€€Ross€and€Ryan€each€said,Ļš šNo.ššĢą@ ą*€*€*Ģą8 ąą ąThese€boys€love€each€of€their€parents€but€feel€a€strong€need€to€please€both€ofĻthem.€€I€appreciate€the€Courtššs€not€questioning€the€boys€as€to€their€preference€as€toĻcustodial€parent.€€These€boys€are€both€too€immature€emotionally€to€handle€thatĻdecision€at€present.€€The€feeling€of€guilt€they€would€assume€if€they€felt€responsibleĻfor€the€decision€would€be€most€stressful€to€them.̜ĢĢ›ą8 ąą ąMy€evaluation€is€that€the€boys€do€not€fear€Kenny€or€Donna€[sic].€TheyĻappear€to€be€happy€with€their€current€living€arrangements€but€do€not€wish€toĻdisappoint€their€father.€€The€negative€statements€by€the€boys€in€the€notes€and€inĻpsychological€evaluations€appear€to€be€secondary€to€their€need€to€please€bothĻparents„„an€impossible€task.ĢĢÓÓą ąAt€the€second€hearing€on€this€matter,€Mr.€Williams€testified€that€he€had€changed€jobs€yetĻanother€time€€since€the€previous€hearing.€€Mother€presented€testimony€and€stipulated€statementsĻfrom€eleven€witnesses:€relatives,€teachers,€coaches,€and€others€in€contact€with€Mother€and€theĻtwins.€€These€witnesses€testified€that€Mother€was€a€good€parent,€that€she€was€involved€in€schoolĻand€sports€activities,€that€the€boys€had€a€good€relationship€with€Mr.€Maynard,€that€Mr.€MaynardĻdid€not€live€at€Motherššs€home€and€did€not€engage€in€inappropriate€conduct,€and€that€Father€hadĻrarely€participated€in€the€twinsšš€school€or€sports€activities.Ģą ąAfter€hearing€all€the€proof€and€assessing€the€demeanor€and€credibility€of€the€witnesses€whoĻtestified€at€the€hearings,€the€trial€court€issued€an€order€from€the€bench€granting€custody€to€Father,Ļand€later€entered€written€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€In€its€written€findings,€the€trialĻcourt€found€that€a€substantial€change€of€circumstances€had€occurred€since€the€final€decree€ofĻdivorce€was€entered€granting€custody€to€Mother.€€The€trial€court€found€the€following€changes€inĻcircumstances:ĢÓÓą8 ą1.€€The€improvement€in€Mr.€Williamsšš€mental€and€emotional€status€since€the€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ļdivorce;Ģą8 ą2.€€The€improvement€in€Mr.€Williamsšš€job€stability€since€the€divorce;Ģą8 ą3.€€Mr.€Williamsšš€marriage€to€a€responsible,€caring€and€loving€woman;Ģą8 ą4.€€Mr.€Williamsšš€establishment€of€a€stable€family€atmosphere;Ģą8 ą5.€€Ms.€Williamsšš€keeping€of€company€with€Mr.€Maynord€[sic]€without€the€benefit€€€€€€Ļof€€wedlock€in€what€the€Court€considers€to€be€an€unstable€relationship.ĢĢÓÓThe€trial€court€then€did€a€comparative€analysis€on€the€issue€of€custody,€focusing€on€the€factors€setĶforth€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€šš€36„6„106.Ģą ąIn€its€comparative€fitness€analysis,€the€trial€court€indicated€that€the€boys€love€both€parentsĻand€noted€that€Father€had€failed€to€pay€child€support,€while€Mother€had€at€times€held€down€moreĻthan€one€job€to€support€the€children.€€The€trial€court€also€noted€the€importance€of€continuity€and€theĻlength€of€time€the€children€had€lived€with€Mother€since€the€divorce.ĢœĒ›ą ąThe€trial€court€then€found€that€Father€and€his€current€wife€have€a€stable€family€unit.€€ItĻstated€that€Mother:ĢÓÓą8 ąhas€for€the€past€many€months€kept€company€with€Mr.€Kenny€Maynord€[sic]Ļwithout€the€benefit€of€wedlock.€Although€the€proof€is€not€satisfactory€that€Mr.ĻMaynord€[sic]€has€spent€the€night€in€the€home€when€the€boys€were€present,€it€isĻclear€that€boys€of€this€age€understand€the€nature€of€their€motherššs€relationship€withĻMr.€Maynord€[sic].€€The€Court€finds€that€there€is€a€certain€amount€of€resentment€toĻthis€relationship€and€to€Mr.€Maynord€[sic]€on€the€part€of€Ross€Williams.ĢĢÓÓThe€trial€court€stated€its€positive€impression€of€Fatherššs€current€wife€and€that€it€was€š šnot€asϜimpressedšš›€œwith›€Mr.€Maynard.€€It€then€stated:ĢÓÓą8 ąThe€final€and€perhaps€decisive€factor€in€the€Courtššs€judgment€that€these€two€youngĻmen€need€a€steady,€strong,€male€influence€in€their€lives.€€They€are€at€the€point€ofĻbecoming€young€men.€.€.€.€[T]he€chances€that€these€boys€will€reach€mature,Ļproductive€adulthood€in€[sic]€enhanced€by€their€being€placed€in€the€custody€of€theirĻfather,€Mr.€Williams.€ĢĢÓÓThe€trial€court€then€ordered€that€the€partiesšš€sons€be€placed€in€the€custody€of€Father,€with€visitationĻfor€Mother.Ģą ąThe€trial€court€found€that€Father€remained€in€arrears€on€his€child€support€obligation,€withĻthe€amount€at€that€time€totaling€œ$6,127.84,›€including€interest.€€It€ordered€him€to€pay€the€arrearageĻto€Mother€in€weekly€œpayments›€but€also€ordered€Mother€to€pay€child€support€to€Father.Ģą ąMother€now€appeals€the€trial€courtššs€change€of€custody€to€Father.€€Mother€argues€that€theĻtrial€court€erred€in€finding€that€there€had€been€a€sufficient€change€in€circumstances€to€justify€a€newĻevaluation€of€the€issue€of€custody.€€In€the€alternative,€Mother€contends,€even€if€there€were€a€changeĻin€circumstances,€the€evidence€preponderated€against€the€determination€that€placing€custody€withĻFather€was€in€the€best€interest€of€the€children.€€Father€argues€that€the€proof€established€a€significantĻchange€in€circumstances€and€that€the€evidence€preponderated€in€favor€of€the€trial€courtššs€decision€toĻchange€custody€to€Father.Ģą ąOur€review€of€the€trial€courtššs€findings€of€fact€isņ ņņņ€de€novoó óóó€upon€the€record,€accompaniedĻby€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€trial€courtššs€factual€findings.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€ĻNo€such€presumption€attaches€to€the€trial€courtššs€conclusions€of€law.€€€ņ ņņņAdams€v.€DeanĶRoofing€Co.ó óóó,€715€S.W.2d€341,€343€(Tenn.€App.€1986).Ģą ąUnder€the€doctrine€of€res€judicata,€a€second€suit€on€the€same€cause€of€action€between€theĻsame€parties€is€barred€with€respect€to€all€issues€which€were€or€could€have€been€litigated€in€the€firstĻlawsuit.€€ņ ņņņWall€v.€Walló óóó,€907€S.W.2d€829,€832€(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€Therefore,€an€orderĻawarding€custody€cannot€be€changed€in€the€absence€of€a€showing€of€new€facts€or€š šchangedĻcircumstancesšš€requiring€an€alteration€of€the€original€custody€award.€€ņ ņņņWoodard€v.€Woodardó óóó,Ļ783€S.W.2d€188,€189€(Tenn.€App.€1989).€€On€a€petition€to€change€custody,€the€trial€court€does€notĻsimply€repeat€the€comparative€fitness€analysis€usually€done€at€the€time€of€the€original€custodyĻdecree.€€Rather,€the€trial€court€must€first€find€a€material€change€in€circumstances€š šcompellingĻenough€to€warrant€a€change€in€custody.šš€€ņ ņņņShort€v.€Shortó óóó,€No.€03A01„9506„CH„00168,€1995ĻWL€728521,€at€*2€(Tenn.€App.€Dec.€11,€1995);€ņ ņņņsee€also€Woodardó óóó,€783€€S.W.2d€at€189„90.€ĻThis€analysis€was€discussed€in€ņ ņņņWalló óóó:ĢÓÓą8 ąą ąWhen€two€people€join€in€conceiving€a€child,€they€select€that€childššs€naturalĻparents.€€When€they€decide€to€separate€and€divorce,€they€give€up€the€privilege€ofĻjointly€rearing€the€child,€and€the€divorce€court€must€decide€which€parent€will€haveĻprimary€responsibility€for€rearing€the€child.€€This€decision€of€the€Court€is€notĻchangeable€except€for€š šchange€of€circumstancesšš€which€is€defined€as€that€whichĻrequires€a€change€to€prevent€substantial€harm€to€the€child.€€Custody€is€not€changedĻfor€the€welfare€or€pleasure€of€either€parent€or€to€punish€either€parent,€but€to€preserveĻthe€welfare€of€the€child.€€Custody€is€not€changed€because€one€parent€is€able€toĻfurnish€a€more€commodious€or€pleasant€environment€than€the€other,€but€whereĻcontinuation€of€the€adjudicated€custody€will€substantially€harm€the€child.ĢĢÓÓņ ņņņWalló óóó,€907€S.W.2d€at€834.€€The€type€of€behavior€by€the€custodial€parent€required€to€justify€aĻchange€in€custody€was€discussed€in€ņ ņņņMusselman€v.€Acuffó óóó,€826€S.W.2d€920€(Tenn.€App.Ļ1991),€in€which€the€appellate€court€reversed€the€trial€courtššs€decision€to€change€custody€from€theĻmother€to€the€father.€€The€ņ ņņņMusselmanó óóó€court€quoted€a€Mississippi€decision€in€which€the€trial€courtĻhad€removed€a€child€from€his€motherššs€custody€because€she€had€cohabited€with€a€lover:ĢÓÓą8 ąš šFurthermore,€it€was€manifest€error€to€hold€that€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€thisĻcase€supported€a€modification€of€this€childššs€custody.€€It€must€be€recognized€thatĻuprooting€a€child€from€his€mother,€school€and€environment€was€a€jolting,€traumaticĻexperience.€€It€is€only€that€behavior€of€a€parent€which€clearly€posits€or€causesĻdanger€to€the€mental€or€emotional€well„being€of€a€child€(whether€such€behavior€isĻimmoral€or€not),€which€is€sufficient€basis€to€seriously€consider€the€drastic€legalĶaction€of€changing€custody.€This€case€not€[sic]€not€remotely€reach€any€suchĻproportion.ššĢĢÓÓņ ņņņMusselmanó óóó,€826€S.W.2d€at€œ923„24€(quoting›€ņ ņņņBallard€v.€Ballardó óóó,€434€So.€2d€1357,€1360Ļ(Miss.€1983)).€€This€Court€has€repeatedly€emphasized€the€importance€of€stability€for€childrenĻinvolved€in€a€divorce:ĢÓÓą8 ą[T]he€stability€provided€by€the€continuation€of€a€successful€relationship€with€aĻparent€who€has€been€in€day€to€day€contact€with€a€child€generally€far€outweighs€anyĻalleged€advantage€which€might€accrue€to€the€child€as€a€result€of€custodial€change.€ĻIn€short,€when€all€goes€well€with€children,€stability,€not€change,€is€in€their€bestĻinterests.ĢĢÓÓņ ņņņContreras€v.€Wardó óóó,€831€S.W.2d€288,€290€(Tenn.€App.€1991)€(quoting€ņ ņņņSartoph€v.€Sartophó óóó,€Ļ354€A.2d€467,€473€(Md.€œ1976)).›ĢœĒ›ą ąIn€sum,€then,€in€determining€whether€to€change€custody,€the€noncustodial€parent€has€theĻburden€of€proving€a€material€change€in€circumstances,€that€is,€behavior€by€the€custodial€parentĻwhich€clearly€endangers€the€well„being€of€the€child.€€Only€after€it€is€determined€that€such€a€materialĻchange€in€circumstances€has€occurred€does€the€trial€court€perform€a€comparative€fitness€analysis€toĻdetermine€if€custody€should€be€changed.€€Efforts€by€the€noncustodial€parent€to€improve€his€or€herĻcircumstances€are€insufficient€to€support€a€determination€of€material€change€in€circumstances;€theyĻare€usually€relevant€only€to€the€comparative€fitness€analysis€performed€after€there€has€been€aĻthreshold€finding€of€a€material€change€in€œthe€circumstance›œs€of€the€custodial€parent.›Ģą ąIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€found€five€changes€in€circumstances€since€the€partiesšš€divorce.€ĻThe€first€four€factors€related€to€improvement€in€Fatherššs€circumstances€since€the€divorce.× ƒ( ××  ׀€SuchĻimprovements€regarding€Father€normally€would€become€relevant€only€after€it€had€been€determinedĻthat€there€had€been€a€material€change€in€circumstances€regarding€Mother.ĢÓÓÓÓą ąThe€last€change€in€circumstances€found€by€the€trial€court€was€š šMrs.€Williamsšš€keeping€ofĻcompany€with€Mr.€Maynord€[sic]€without€the€benefit€of€wedlock€in€what€the€Court€considers€to€beĻan€unstable€relationship.šš€€The€trial€court€acknowledged€that€the€proof€was€š šnot€satisfactoryšš€thatĻMr.€Maynard€had€spent€the€night€at€Motherššs€home€when€the€boys€were€present€but€stated€thatĻš šboys€of€this€age€understand€the€nature€of€their€motherššs€relationship€with€Mr.€Maynord€[sic].šš€ĻThe€trial€court€found€that€Ross€Williams€had€š ša€certain€amount€of€resentmentšš€toward€Mr.€MaynardĻand€that€there€existed€š šsome€hostilityšš€between€the€boys€and€Mr.€Maynard.€€On€this€basis,€the€trialĻcourt€changed€custody€to€Father.€ĢÓÓÓÓą ąThe€record€contains€conflicting€proof€regarding€the€twinsšš€hostility€toward€Mr.€Maynard.€ItĻis€undisputed€that€one€or€both€boys€wrote€two€notes€referring€to€œš šhiring›€a€hit€œmanšš›€for€Mr.ĻMaynard€€and€made€other€remarks€about€Mr.€Maynard.€€€Fatherššs€expert,€Dr.€Bilbrey,€concludedĶthat€the€boys€harbored€hostility€toward€Mr.€Maynard.€€However,€the€boys€told€the€trial€judge€inĻchambers€that€Mr.€Maynard€was€š šnice.šš€€After€the€trial€judge€ordered€the€boysšš€treatingĻpsychologist,€Dr.€Averitt,€to€examine€them,€Dr.€Averitt€concluded€that€the€twins€did€not€dislike€orĻfear€Mr.€Maynard€but€made€negative€statements€about€Mr.€Maynard€in€an€effort€to€please€Father.€ĻMother€presented€numerous€witnesses€who€testified€that€Mr.€Maynard€engaged€in€various€activitiesĻwith€the€partiesšš€sons€and€had€a€good€relationship€with€them.Ģą ąThe€trial€judge,€of€course,€had€the€opportunity€to€observe€the€witnessesšš€demeanor€duringĻtheir€testimony,€and€the€weight€and€credit€accorded€the€witnesses€by€the€trial€judge€is€entitled€toĻgreat€weight.€€ņ ņņņIn€re€Parsonsó óóó,€914€S.W.2d€889,€895€(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€There€was€sufficientĻevidence€in€this€case€to€support€the€trial€courtššs€finding€that€the€boys€harbored€š šsome€hostilityšš€andĻš šsome€resentmentšš€toward€Mr.€Maynard.Ģą ąHowever,€the€record€does€not€contain€evidence€from€which€the€trial€court€could€concludeĻthat€Motherššs€relationship€with€Mr.€Maynard€was€š šunstablešš€or€that€the€š šnaturešš€of€the€relationshipĻwas€€improper€or€injurious€to€the€twins.€€The€evidence€is€unrefuted€that€Mother€and€Mr.€MaynardĻhad€dated€steadily€for€three€years,€that€both€had€been€employed€in€their€respective€job€positions€forĻmany€years,€that€Mr.€Maynard€had€not€spent€the€night€at€Motherššs€home€while€the€boys€were€there,Ļthat€Mr.€Maynard€lived€with€his€widowed€mother€and€not€with€Mother,€and€that€Mother€and€Mr.ĻMaynard€had€not€married€only€because€of€the€twinsšš€fear€that€a€new€husband€would€abuse€her€asĻFather€had.€€While€this€Court€gives€deference€to€the€trial€courtššs€observation€that€it€was€š šnot€œasĻimpressedšš›€with€Mr.€Maynard,€the€record€does€not€contain€proof€from€which€the€trial€court€couldĻconclude€that€Mr.€Maynard€had€engaged€in€substantial€inappropriate€behavior€in€the€boysššĻpresence.€€The€record€includes€testimony€that€Mr.€Maynard€once€fired€a€pistol€in€Motherššs€backĻyard,€that€he€had€drunk€a€beer€there€while€outside€barbecuing,€and€that€he€smoked€until€two€yearsĻprior€to€his€testimony.€€Particularly€when€viewed€against€the€backdrop€of€Fatherššs€past€conduct,Ļsuch€as€his€physical€abuse€of€Mother,€his€drinking€and€smoking,€and€having€his€current€wife,€priorĻto€their€marriage,€spend€the€night€in€his€home€while€the€boys€were€there,€Mr.€Maynardššs€conductĶdoes€not€support€a€finding€of€a€material€change€in€circumstances.Ģą ąThe€record€demonstrates€that€the€remainder€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€Motherššs€careĻof€the€children€are€unchanged.€€She€remains€employed€at€Tutco,€as€she€has€been€for€twenty„twoĻyears,€she€remains€in€the€same€home€the€parties€occupied€during€their€marriage,€the€boysššĻschoolwork€remained€satisfactory€until€they€learned€of€Fatherššs€petition€to€change€custody,€andĻMother€has€continued€to€be€heavily€involved€in€the€boysšš€school€and€extracurricular€activities.ĢœĒ›ą ąViewed€as€a€whole,€and€considering€the€importance€placed€on€stability€for€children€inĻdivorced€families,€the€evidence€does€not€support€a€finding€that€Mother€has€engaged€in€or€permittedĻMr.€Maynard€to€engage€in€š šbehavior€.€.€.€which€clearly€posits€or€causes€danger€to€the€mental€orĻemotional€well„being€of€a€child€.€.€.€which€is€sufficient€basis€to€seriously€consider€the€drastic€legalĻaction€of€changing€custody.šš€ņ ņņņMusselmanó óóó,€826€S.W.2d€at€œ924;›€œņ ņņņsee›€also€Contrerasó óóó,€831ĻS.W.2d€at€290€(regarding€stability).€€Therefore,€Father€has€not€carried€his€burden€of€demonstratingĻa€change€in€circumstances€sufficiently€compelling€to€warrant€changing€custody.Ģą ąEven€if€such€a€change€in€circumstances€were€present,€the€evidence€regarding€theĻcomparative€fitness€analysis€between€Mother€and€Father€does€not€preponderate€in€favor€of€€anĻaward€of€custody€to€Father.€€ņņņ ņSee€ó óóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€36„6„106€(1996).€€The€evidence€isĻundisputed€that€Mother€has€been€the€boysšš€primary€œcaregiver›€for€twelve€years,€since€their€birth,Ļand€that€she€has€worked€steadily€to€provide€for€their€material€needs,€even€working€multiple€jobs€atĻtimes€when€Father€failed€to€pay€child€support.€€The€proof€also€establishes€that€Mother€has€providedĻa€stable€home€for€the€boys€and€is€a€stable€parent.€€Numerous€witnesses€testified€regarding€MotherššsĻinvolvement€in€the€boysšš€school€and€extracurricular€activities,€and€testimony€established€that€theĻboys€did€well€in€school€while€in€Motherššs€custody,€except€after€Fatherššs€petition€for€a€change€inĻcustody€was€filed.Ģą ąIn€contrast,€Father€has€not€been€the€boysšš€primary€œcaregiver.›€€His€consistent€arrearage€inĻchild€support,€while€not€determinative,€is€significant€in€assessing€his€dedication€as€a€parent,€and€itĻis€noteworthy€that€his€petition€to€change€custody€was€filed€only€after€Mother€initiated€efforts€toĻcollect€the€arrearage.€€While€Father€has€remarried,€his€employment€has€remained€unstable.€€TheĻevidence€€was€undisputed€that€Father€was€largely€uninvolved€in€the€boysšš€school€and€sportsĻactivities.Ģą ąThe€last€factor€to€be€considered€is€the€character€and€behavior€of€any€other€person€whoĻresides€in€or€frequents€the€parentššs€home.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€36„6„106(9)(1996).€€The€trial€courtĻstated€that€it€was€š šimpressedšš€with€Fatherššs€current€wife,€Donnia€Williams,€noting€her€love,Ķcaring,€support,€and€genuine€interest€in€the€twins.€€The€trial€court€also€stated€that€it€was€š šnot€asĻimpressedšš€with€Mr.€Maynard.€€This€is€an€important€factor,€and€this€Court€gives€great€weight€toĻthe€trial€courtššs€ability€to€view€the€witnesses€and€assess€their€demeanor.€€ņ ņņņSee€In€re€Parsonsóóó ó,€914ĻS.W.2d€at€895.€€However,€while€there€is€evidence€to€support€the€trial€courtššs€finding€that€the€boysĻhad€š šsome€hostilityšš€toward€Mr.€Maynard,€as€noted€above,€the€evidence€does€not€support€a€findingĻthat€Mr.€Maynard€engaged€in€substantial€behavior€detrimental€to€the€twins.€€Moreover,€whileĻanother€person€who€resides€in€or€frequents€the€parentššs€home€is€a€significant€consideration,€theĻprimary€comparison€regarding€fitness€for€custody€remains€between€the€two€ņņņ ņparentsó óóó.€€Ģą ąThe€trial€court€also€noted€as€a€š šdecisivešš€factor€the€fact€that€the€partiesšš€sons€š šneed€a€steady,Ļstrong,€male€influence€in€their€lives.šš€€Children€of€both€genders,€of€course,€need€a€healthyĻinfluence€from€both€their€male€and€female€parents€or€guardians.€€Involvement€by€Father€in€theĻpartiesšš€sonsšš€school€and€extracurricular€activities€would€help€provide€the€boys€with€a€moreĻsignificant€male€influence€in€their€lives.Ģą ąIn€sum,€the€evidence€does€not€support€the€trial€courtššs€finding€of€a€change€in€MotherššsĻcircumstances€sufficiently€compelling€to€warrant€a€change€in€custody€from€Mother€to€Father.€ĻMoreover,€even€if€there€were€such€a€change€in€circumstances,€the€evidence€preponderates€againstĻthe€trial€courtššs€determination€that,€in€comparison,€Father€is€the€more€fit€of€the€two€parents€to€haveĻcustody.Ģą ąThe€trial€courtššs€award€of€custody€to€Michael€C.€Williams€is€reversed.€€The€trial€courtššsĻorder€requiring€Mr.€œWilliams›€to€make€payments€on€his€arrearage€in€child€support€remains€in€effect.€ĻThe€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€regarding€a€transfer€in€custody,Ļappropriate€visitation€with€Father,€insurance€matters,€any€remaining€child€support€arrearage,€futureĻchild€support,€and€other€pertinent€matters.Ģą ąThe€order€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed€in€part,€affirmed€in€part,€and€remanded€for€furtherĻproceedings€consistent€with€this€Opinion.€€Costs€are€assessed€against€Appellee,€for€whichĻexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ģ€€ĢĢÓÓą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąņ ņóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ģó óą ąņ ņĢCONCUR:ĢĢņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ĢœóóALAN€E.€HIGHERS,›€J.€€€€€€€ĢĢĢņņ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóĢBEN€H.€œCANTRELL,›€œJ.ó ó›ą ąĢą ąĢą ąĢą ąą ąĢą ą€œ›œ›ą ą