Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In adjudicating custody and visitation rights, the most important factor to be considered is the best interests of the children in view of all of the circumstances ( see, e.g., Friederwitzer v. Friederwitzer, 55 N.Y.2d 89, 95-96; Matter of Cline v. Cline, 229 A.D.2d 671, 672). Deference is generally accorded the Family Court's findings of fact because it was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses ( see, e.g., Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 173). Its findings may not be set aside or modified unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record ( see, e.g., Matter of Darlene T., 28 N.Y.2d 391, 395; Matter of Khan v. Khan, 236 A.D.2d 612, 613; McDonald v. McDonald, 216 A.D.2d 277; Matter of Newton v. Newton, 210 A.D.2d 337). Absent extraordinary circumstances where visitation would be detrimental to the child's well-being, a noncustodial parent has a right to meaningful visitation privileges ( see, Weiss v. Weiss, 52 N.Y.2d 170, 175; Matter of Michael F. v. Cerise S., 224 A.D.2d 692, 693), including unsupervised visitation ( see, e.g., Matter of Hernandez v. Arroyo, 203 A.D.2d 461).
We conclude that the Family Court properly determined that unsupervised visitation by the father with his two daughters would not be detrimental to their welfare ( see, Matter of Hernandez v. Arroyo, supra; Nacson v. Nacson, 166 A.D.2d 510; Shink v. Shink, 140 A.D.2d 506; Resnick v. Zoldan, 134 A.D.2d 246). Accordingly, we decline to disturb its determination ( Matter of Darlene T., supra; Valenza v. Valenza, 143 A.D.2d 860).
Miller, J.P., Thompson, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.