Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
by the custodial parent with the noncustodial parent’s visitation rights does not justify a modification of a child custody order. See, e.g., Woncik v. Woncik, 82 N.C. App. 244, 248, 346 S.E.2d 277, 279 (1986). In the instant case, however, the trial court’s findings of fact reflected far more than the mere interference with defendant’s visitation rights, warranting the court’s intervention. As noted supra, the trial court characterized the child’s relationship with defendant, his father, as a good relationship and further found that the child looked forward to seeing defendant. The trial court’s findings indicate that the denial of defendant’s visitation was deceitful and more than simply an interference or frustration with his rights, as it encompassed a considerable period. See id. . Furthermore, denying the minor child
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that parent has custodial right to prevent visitation with nonparent
B. holding interference with visitation of the noncustodial parent   that negatively impacts    the welfare of the child can constitute a substantial change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a change of custody
C. holding that the domicile of the child follows that of the parent with lawful custody
D. holding that psychological parent was not entitled to custody or visitation
E. holding that where interference with visitation becomes so pervasive as to harm the childs close relationship with the noncustodial parent there can be a conclusion drawn that the actions of the custodial parent show a disregard for the best interests of the child warranting a change of custody
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.