With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the progression of this case.” The father appeals, arguing that the court applied the “best interests of the child” standard, and thereby erred, and that the court abused its discretion regarding evidence presented by the mother that, he says, he refuted during the proceeding. We find the father’s arguments without merit. When a noncustodial parent seeks a modification of a prior custody determination, the court must apply the evidentiary standard set forth in Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863 (Ala.1984). The McLendon standard applies when the parents share joint legal custody and a previous judicial determination places primary physical custody of the child with one parent. Scacca v. Scacca, 694 So.2d 1 (Ala.Civ.App.1997); see also Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322 (Ala.1996) (<HOLDING>). The petitioning parent must show by

A: holding that provisions concerning joint custody and healthcare of the parties child were consistent with the signed notes
B: holding that nolostprofits clause in parties agreement was not unconscionable as a matter of law in part because similar clause had been in the agreement between the parties for years
C: holding that hearing officers noting the parties agreement did not constitute a change in the parties legal relationship
D: holding that the mclendon standard applied where an agreement between the parties granted the parties joint legal custody of the child with physical custody to the mother and the agreement had been adopted by the trial court
D.