Father did not file an appellee brief, nor did the GAL, whose appointment expired with the entry of the final custody order. Typically, we review child custody orders for an abuse of discretion. S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (PA. Super. 2018). We have explained that a court abuses its discretion when, inter alia, "the course pursued represents not merely an error of judgment, but…where the record shows the action is a result of partiality, prejudice, bias or ill will."

23 Pa.C.S. § 5330(a), (b). "[P]rocedural due process requires, at its core, adequate notice, opportunity to be heard, and the chance to defend oneself before a fair and impartial tribunal having jurisdiction over the case." S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1161 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted). "Formal notice and an opportunity to be heard are fundamental components of due process when a person may be deprived in a legal proceeding of a liberty interest, such as physical freedom, or a parent's custody of her child."

This Court has noted that the current version of the Custody Act does not contain a provision for an award of "visitation." See S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1165 (Pa.Super. 2018). In S.T., supra, we held that an incarcerated parent's request for the right to contact his or her child via telephone is to be construed as a request seeking "supervised physical custody" requiring the trial court's consideration of the factors set forth in 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5328(a).

We review a custody order under an abuse of discretion standard. S.T. v. R.W., ___ A.3d ___, 2018 PA Super 192, *2 (filed June 29, 2018). We must defer to the trial court "with regard to issues of credibility and weight of the evidence," and "accept [the] findings of the trial court that are supported by competent evidence of record, as our role does not include making independent factual determinations."

S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted).

S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted).

S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted).

S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted).

"A question regarding whether a due process violation occurred is a question of law for which the standard of review is de novo and the scope of review is plenary." S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citation omitted). "In custody hearings, parents have at stake fundamental rights: namely, the right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their child."

We may reject the conclusions of the trial court only if they involve an error of law, or are unreasonable in light of the sustainable findings of the trial court. S.T. v. R.W., 192 A.3d 1155, 1160 (Pa.Super. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted).