Deviating
from Child Support Guidelines
by
James P. Reape
Denise C. appealed
the trial court order requiring her former spouse, Kevin, to pay
less monthly child support than required by the Statewide Uniform
Guidelines. When the trial court made the order, Kevin had minimal
visitation with his two daughters, due to investigations into allegations
of his improper conduct with the girls. {Similar allegations had
previously been raised, then rejected. Due to the resurfacing of
the allegations, the juvenile court reduced Kevin's visitation time
from twenty-percent (20%) to one percent (1%)}. Monthly guideline
support was $816.00 if Kevin's visitation was twenty percent (20%),
and $1,121.00 if it was one percent (1%).
The trial court found
Kevin's visitation time was one percent (1%), yet it set child support
at $ 816.00 per month, rejecting the guideline on grounds it provided
Denise with household income "Substantially in excess of their
expenses, while leaving Kevin with a shortfall of income v. expenses."
The parties' Income and Expense Declarations showed that, under
both support amounts, each household's income would fall short of
it's expressed expenses. Under the guideline, however, Denise would
nearly meet her expenses, yet Kevin would fall short by almost $1,000.00
each month.
The Appellate Court
reversed the trial court's decision, thus reaffirming the legislative
intent in enacting the guidelines and detailing the extremely limited
exceptions to the application of the formula.
"The legislature
has established a strong presumption that parental income levels,
coupled with custodial time, and not parental discretionary
spending patterns, shall determine the level of family support,
absent some special or unusual circumstances resulting in injustice.
. . the legislature did not intend that children of less frugal
parents survive on reduced support payments to accommodate a higher
parental living standard.
Virtually every child
support order diminishes the living standard of the payor parent."
Said diminished standard
of living is not an injustice. If, in fact, expenses are considered
a special circumstance allowing deviation from the guideline, control
of the outcome would rest, to a large extent, in the hands of the
payor parent.
|