Support Obligations of a Parent
The tiral court did not abuse its discretion by requiring father to pay the medical expenses of children to the extent those expenses were covered by his insurance. Imes v. Imes.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by setting the child support payments of father at $25 per week for daughter. Imes v. Imes.
Where respondent husband did not object to the terms of the dissolution judgment imposing support obligations solely on him, and where he never appealed the dissolution judgment, the trial court properly ordered that the noncustodial wife was not required to pay child support. In re Kraft.
The support of a child is the joint and several obligation of both the husband and the wife. In re Butler.
The financial responsibility for the support of the child is a joint and several obligation of each parent, and is proper for the court to consider the income and assets of the wife and husband in setting the amount awarded. Riordan v. Riordan.
The obligation of the father to support his children begins when the child is born and continues during the minority of the child. This obligation of the father to support his minor child is not affected by a decree granting a divorce, nor by a decree granting the care and custody of his child to his wife or some other suitable person. Nelson v. Nelson.
When the parents of a child are divorced and no mention is made in the decree for the care and custody of minor child, under the law, the father is still bound to provide a reasonable and proper support for a minor child. People ex rel. Hartshorn v. Hartshorn.
The duty of a parent to support his minor child arises out of a natural relationship. Nelson v. Nelson.
See Also: Womens Divorce