Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by modifying the joint custody arrangement to grant sole legal and physical custody of the parties' children to the mother. The record clearly indicates that the parties were unable to communicate in a mature, civil manner. Therefore, the joint custody arrangement was no longer viable (see, Braiman v Braiman, 44 N.Y.2d 584, 589-590; Matter of Sooy v. Sooy, 101 A.D.2d 287, 288, affd sub nom. Matter of Louise E.S. v. W. Stephen S., 64 N.Y.2d 946; Dodd v. Dodd, 93 Misc.2d 641).
Additionally, the Family Court properly found that an award of sole custody to the mother was in the best interests of the children based upon the testimony of the parties, the recommendations of the examining psychiatrist and the Law Guardian, the forensic and probation reports, and the court's in camera interview of the children (see, Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167; Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, 40 N.Y.2d 543, 551). Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.