include findings of fact which support the determination of what is in the best interest of the child. N.C.G.S. § 5043.2(a) (1987). The determination of what “will best promote the interest and welfare of the child,” that is, “what is in the best interest of the child,” is a conclusion of law, Steele v. Steele, 36 N.C. App. 601, 604, 244 S.E.2d 466, 468 (1978), and this conclusion must be supported by findings of fact as to the characteristics of the parties competing for custody. Id. “These findings may concern the physical, mental, or financial fitness or any other factors brought out by the evidence and relevant to the issue of the welfare of the child.” Id. These findings cannot, however, be mere conclusions. See Kerns v. Southern, 100 N.C. App. 664, 667, 397 S.E.2d 651, 653 (1990) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the trial court made some
holding conclusory statements in visitation dispute were not adequate to support awarding visitation rights holding that psychological parent was not entitled to custody or visitation holding visitation statute unconstitutional because it disregards presumption favoring parental decisionmaking forcing parents to prove visitation not in childs best interest recognizing right of fit parent to prevent visitation by grandparents which right can only be overridden by court based on evidence that the prevention of the visitation would harm the child holding that uncertainty regarding amount of visitation ordered is fatal to the validity of a trial courts visitation  award