clearly was not shouldn't have been an obvious or misconstrued facts that the judge came to that conclusion these four children have two fourteen year old boys we have a twelve year old daughter and a ten year old daughter they're all in excellent hands when they're with mr eric smith who is the father of the children who is with me in court today they are with him on monday through wednesday six pm and then with the mother  mother cassie smith who is also an excellent parent when stays to friday six pm with the parties alternating weekends yes as the trial judge recognize these individuals did have communication issues i submit to the tor your honor is that any parties going through a divorce have communication issues but when you look to what they did  and what they were able to work towards for their children this was obviously the appropriate appropriate result the trial court recognized they pushed each other's buttons but when you look to the agreement which they entered into as of october of two thousand and fifteen and even before they were operating under the same parenting schedule than the trial court entered here and there was no evidence that it was not working for the children as this court knows that the most important element is how the children are doing and how the parents can work towards the best for the children in this case the only thing the parents could not agree with was what was the permanent schedule going to be they agreed to the youngest child i e p t they actively participated in then they agreed the children should participate in counseling they also agreed if necessary or recommended they would participate in that counseling agree to a holiday schedule they agreed that the youngest child should attend a christian school earlier on because it was a smaller school they have two older children should be able to work and mr smith's place of business so clearly this was a situation where the parties were able to work together and substantially comply with a parenting plan  required under the six zero two point one factors the other factor being the residential circumstances we have the parties living both living close to one for a half miles off side of h h's the other one in hayworth the children attending hayward schools it's a perfect situation for both parents to be able to continue to be actively involved with the children for the children to have as much positive reinforcement from from both parents and as a as i conceded your honour's yes there were there were some communication issues and quite frankly a trial there were some you know he's done this or she's done that and i recognize that every case is different one when the court is looking at custody but i would direct more to a prior case of discourse and that's in parenting plan is working it's not pro so so to say why try to fix it i think it is clear your honor said the trial court's ruling was not against the manifest  we obviously have wishes of parents under best interest factors parents always may have differences of opinion but neither parent really attack the other one or question the ability to to be a good parent to these to these children i would submit to the court that the issues that arose between the cassie and eric were issues that typically arise in dissolution of marriage proceedings but they did not rise to the level of affecting the children and the wellbeing of the children with regard to the wishes of the child  we did have the two older children who had expressed a desire that the parents have a shared parenting schedule was your guardian or relationship to children with the parents both parents had witnesses both parents testified to their active involvement in the children's lives the children's adjustment to homeschooling community again their staying in heyworth they will continue to attend the hayward schools with regard to any physical violence there was some testimony from cassie however obviously the trial for being the judge of the credibility of  witnesses and the fact that there was never any type of order of protection warranted the trial court found that not to be a relevant factor with regard to the best interest factors to the willingness of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close relationship again your honour's i would direct the core to the memorandum of agreement that the parties have entered into they've they've agreed and this is almost two years ago read they will support each other and support the children in having a positive relationship with each other they will attend parent teacher conferences they have agreed to an important factor if agreed to an entire holiday and vacation schedule only sticking point was would they agree that they would share the time with the children and share the heavy comparable parenting schedule now that the court has said this comparable parenting schedule is going to continue they don't have that that was their primary disagreement they don't have that to disagree about anymore and i think the trial court was was definitely right and awarding joint  parenting as well as a as well as a comparable parenting schedule again this case is somewhat similar to another one of the fourth district cases and that's in remarriage of parties when it came right down to it and when it came down to the issues concerning the children they were able to put their heads together they were able to reach agreement and they were able to work in the best interests of the children  believe the trial court's ruling and order is clearly in the best interest of the children and we asked that before affirm the ruling in its entirety you can answer any questions well your honor i would have to submit that whilst there is an allegation of some type of serious and danger meant that parenting plan would remain  place at least under the old statute for at least a two year period i would ask you to a slightly different way is there any provision in the plan to resolve dispute court to have assigned the parenting coordinator so that when issues if issues arise the parenting court nater can get involved and work with the individuals to work through  their communication issues and that the trial court put that into place i think this is even more helpful for a circumstances where there may be