¶1concurring.
¶2I concur in the result and reasoning of the majority. However, I am compelled to note that because an evidentiary hearing was not held, the trial court was required to make several assumptions that were not supported by the record. There is no evidence that there are alternative dates for J.W. to “make-up” missed Sunday services while visiting with her mother. Secondly, while the trial court recognizes there is a difference between regular Sunday worship and religious “classes,” some churches hold separate Sunday church services for children, more akin to instructional classes than adult worship services. Again, there is nothing in the record to establish the type of services held at Fern Creek Christian Church on Sunday mornings.
¶3Wireman also contests several aver-ments in Perkins’s affidavit, yet no reply *923or counter-affidavit was filed with the trial court.
¶4There may well be circumstances where a non-custodial parent should be required to transport a child to a particular church or synagogue, however, based on the evidence in this case, those circumstances have not been shown.