The trial court is vested with broad discretion to make the decisions necessary to safeguard and promote the child's best interests, and its decision will not be set aside unless plainly wrong or without evidence to support it. 9 Va. App. Steinberg bore the burden to present evidence to the trial court demonstrating that a material change in circumstances warranted a change in custody and that the change was in the child's best interests. The trial court's order specifically states that it considered all the statutory factors. The trial court found that the child continues to do well under the current custody and visitation arrangement.
Evidence supports the trial court's decision.
We find no error in the trial court's decision to deny Steinberg's motion to change custody. Failing to Communicate the Basis of the Decision Steinberg contends that the trial court failed to communicate the basis of its decision denying his motion to modify custody and visitation. This contention is not supported by the record. The trial court expressed the basis for its decision in its opinion letter to the parties dated January 24, 2000. X. Discovery Violations Steinberg contends that the trial court allowed Shumaker access to irrelevant materials, including the costs and dates of his trips with the child, but denied him access to information relevant to his pending motions.