There are distinct similarities with the case and PC's situation, however with the currentfact pattern, it is difficult to consider whether the case is "on all fours." In both cases, the father of the children requested visitation rights. The father in both PC's fact pattern andPainter v. Painterphysically abused the child's mother as well as the child. The extent ofthe abuse is not mentioned in PC's fact pattern. In PC's case, the child's father failed toattend court mandated parenting and anger-management classes. The father in PC's casewas also criminally convicted of the abuse. The appellant (Richard Painter) had not beencharged with criminal acts for his abuse of the appellee (Linda Painter) and children. InPainter v. Painter, the father attempted to seek visitation rights with his 16 year old son(Daniel) and his 11 year old daughter (Christina). These ages are significantly older thanPC's child who is 5 years old. Additionally, Daniel suffers from PTSD due to hisexperience with his father. PC's fact pattern does not mention the effect of the abuse onher son. Daniel also attempted to commit suicide after a visit with the appellant andinformed the judge during the trial that he did not want contact with his father (521). Thefact pattern does not mention PC's son's viewpoint. And even if PC's son could expresshimself, it is unlikely that a five year old child's words would carry the same weight as a16 year old child