Opinion
January 25, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Martin, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a new hearing and determination in accordance herewith.
Although the evidence adduced at the hearing conducted pursuant to a prior order of this court (see, Bubbins v Bubbins, 114 A.D.2d 346) indicates that both parties have engaged in conduct antithetical to the best interest of their children, we find that the Supreme Court's order denying the defendant his visitation rights with the parties' two eldest children and terminating his obligation to pay child support to the plaintiff was a drastic and inappropriate remedy given the facts of this case. As we noted in the parties' prior appeal: "The denial of visitation rights to a natural parent is such a drastic remedy that it should only be considered when there is substantial evidence that visitation would be detrimental to the welfare of the child (see, Janousek v Janousek, 108 A.D.2d 782; Katz v Katz, 97 A.D.2d 398; Parker v Parker, 89 A.D.2d 806; Hotze v Hotze, 57 A.D.2d 85, lv denied 42 N.Y.2d 805)" (Bubbins v Bubbins, supra, at 348).
There is insufficient evidence in the record before this court to establish that visitation with the defendant was detrimental to the welfare of the parties' two eldest children. Although the children indicated that they did not wish to continue visitation with the defendant, their expressed wishes should not be viewed as decisive, particularly in light of evidence indicating that the children's feelings were fostered by the plaintiff's hostility towards the defendant (see, Matter of Lincoln v Lincoln, 24 N.Y.2d 270; Hotze v Hotze, 57 A.D.2d 85, lv denied 42 N.Y.2d 805, supra). Therefore, we are remitting the matter to the Supreme Court for a hearing to determine an appropriate schedule of visitation by the defendant with the parties' two eldest children. We note that in view of the obvious deep-rooted hostility between the parties and its harmful effects upon their children, the entire family would benefit from and should submit to family counselling or another appropriate form of therapy. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.