This in itself would destroy the paramount aim of the court, that is, that the welfare of the child be promoted and subserved."Davis v. Davis, 229 N.C. App. 494, 500, 748 S.E.2d 594, 599 (citing Shepherd v. Shepherd, 273 N.C. 71, 75, 159 S.E.2d 357, 361 (1968)). We have consistently held that "the trial court commit[s] reversible error by modifying child custody . . . absent any finding of substantial change of circumstances affecting the welfare of the child."
Finally, such findings are required in order for the appellate court to determine whether the trial court gave due regard to the factors expressly listed in N.C. Gen.Stat. § 50–13.7.Davis v. Davis, ––– N.C.App. ––––, ––––, 748 S.E.2d 594, 599 (2013) (citations and quotation marks omitted). It would appear from the lack of findings of fact and conclusions of law as to the two biological children that the trial court did not find defendant's requests to be supported by the facts, the law, or perhaps both, but still the trial court needs to make findings of fact so that it is clear that defendant's motion to modify custody was addressed in full.