In re Sup. Ct. Comm. Child Support (Per Curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2015 Ark. 384 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS Opinion Delivered October 22, 2015 IN RE SUPREME COURT COMMITTEE ON CHILD SUPPORT; ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NUMBER 10(III)(g) PER CURIAM The Supreme Court Committee on Child Support submitted its report to the court, including the following recommendations: (1) a proposed revision to Administrative Order Number 10(III)(g) on health insurance, (2) revisions to the family support charts, and (3) study of the guideline models. Regarding the first recommendation, the proposed revision regarding health insurance is to add the underlined text: Administrative Order Number 10 .... Section III. Calculation of Support. .... g. Health Insurance. In addition to the award of child support, the court order shall provide for the child's health care needs, which normally would include health insurance if available to either parent at a reasonable cost. Health insurance coverage shall be considered reasonable if the cost of dependent coverage does not exceed 5% of the net income of the parent who is to provide such coverage. In applying the 5% standard for the cost of health insurance, the cost of dependent coverage is the difference between self-only and self with dependents or family coverage or the cost of adding the child(ren) to existing coverage. Cite as 2015 Ark. 384 The purpose of this amendment is to provide an income-based threshold to determine that the cost of health insurance is reasonable. We approve this recommendation and adopt the amendment, effective immediately. The committee advised the court that the study of guideline models, in particular, consideration of following the national trend and moving from the percentage-of-obligor income model to an income shares model, is still ongoing. We agree that this study needs to continue, and we await the committee’s report. Finally, we decline to make any change to the support charts at this time. We thank the committee for its report on these recommendations and its hard work on these important issues.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.