In an Indiana case where the mother was the primary caretaker and had a yearly salary that was about double that of the father, a similar decision was reached. Despite not having primary custody, the father spent more than 40% of the year with the kids. Although the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that Indiana’s rules do not permit a custodial parent to pay child support to a non-custodial parent, it added that a court might order a custodial parent to do so if the state’s criteria led to an unfair outcome.

In a related case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that it is improper for a court to refuse to take into account whether departing from the state’s rules is acceptable, even when doing so might result in a parent receiving child support who is not the main custodial parent.

In these decisions, the courts observed that, depending on the custody arrangement, non-custodial parents may have visiting schedules that are comparable to those of the custodial parents and that are also reasonably priced. As a result, when a child spends about equal amounts of time with each parent, each parent provides almost equivalent care for the child and incurs comparable expenses. In these cases, it is important to consider the non-custodial parent’s income and resources to the custodial parent before imposing a child support order.

The mere fact that a parent is “non-custodial” should not bar them from obtaining assistance if they have less money. The following factors may be taken into consideration when deciding whether to stray from the recommendations’ support levels:

• Unusual obligations and needs
• Additional duties of the parties for assistance
• Additional family income
• The parties’ assets
• Not being covered by insurance for medical costs
• Living conditions of the parties and their offspring
• Other elements, such as the child’s or children’s best interests