Document: CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHEET
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/578.0 CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHEET 2024-03-06 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2024-03-06
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document title: CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHEET
Upon review of the court documents, several points of unjust treatment against Aaron Surina, the father, are evident. The child support payment structure disproportionately burdens him with the majority of the financial responsibilities, despite the income disparity between him and Bryce Kehrer.
Aaron’s monthly income is significantly less than Bryce’s, yet the court’s calculation of child support obligations has unjustly imposed an obligation of $1,357.63 on Aaron, compared to Bryce’s $780.37. This equates to Aaron being held responsible for nearly 64% of the total child support, despite his net income being significantly less than Bryce’s.
Adding to this financial burden, the court appears to have overlooked Aaron’s higher monthly deductions from gross income when calculating the child support obligation. Bryce’s deductions amount to approximately $2,124, compared to Aaron’s $834. These deductions, which significantly reduce Aaron’s net income, don’t seem to be factored into the court’s calculations, further exacerbating the financial inequality.
Furthermore, the documents fail to provide clarity on who bears the responsibility for the children’s health care expenses. While a monthly health insurance premium of $64 is mentioned, it is unclear who is expected to shoulder this cost, which could potentially place an additional financial burden on Aaron.
Additionally, the child support worksheet shows an apparent bias by including a monthly health care expenses credit of $64.00 only for Bryce, with no such credit allocated for Aaron. This bias is further emphasized by the significant disparity in the child support obligations assigned to Aaron and Bryce, placing a higher financial burden on Aaron.
The documents also lack transparency regarding the financial assets of Bryce and Aaron. Bryce’s bank accounts and cash are listed at $100.00, but Aaron’s financial assets are left blank. This lack of transparency could potentially mask the true extent of Bryce’s financial resources, leading to an imbalance in the child support calculations.
Finally, the document fails to provide specific details about other household income or assets, including those of current spouses, domestic partners, or other adults in the household. This omission could disadvantage Aaron by skewing the full financial picture of each parent’s household.
In conclusion, from Aaron’s perspective, the child support worksheet appears to be biased and unfair due to its one-sided financial credits, significant discrepancies in child support obligations, lack of financial transparency, and potential omission of other sources of income. The documents reflect a clear instance of inequality, with the calculations not accurately reflecting the parents’ respective financial circumstances, thus heavily burdening Aaron.
About The Author
