Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Spencer’s paternal grandmother, which resulted in denying the minor child the benefits of access and contact with other members of his extended family. In our view, such findings provide adequate support for the trial court’s initial conclusion that defendant had shown that “a substantial change in circumstance [s]” had occurred during the period following the original custody decree and that the change had affected the welfare of the minor child. In addition to noting that a substantial change in circumstances had adversely affected the welfare of the minor child, the order also includes language indicating that the trial court considered changes in circumstances that could positively affect the circumstances of the minor child. See Pulliam, 348 N.C. at 620, 501 S.E.2d at 900 (<HOLDING>). In finding of fact number nine (finding 9), 
 Holding statements: (A) holding the teenage childrens preference to live in fathers home was sufficient evidence to support a change in physical custody in a modification of a split physical custody arrangement even though the party seeking the change failed to demonstrate a change in circumstances (B) holding that a subsequent petition may be filed upon a showing of a change in circumstances (C) holding interference with visitation of the noncustodial parent   that negatively impacts    the welfare of the child can constitute a substantial change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a change of custody (D) holding that a showing of a change in circumstances that is or is likely to be beneficial to the child may also warrant a change in custody (E) holding court cannot change custody without showing that change is in best interests of child
Output (English): holding court cannot change custody without showing that change is in best interests of child