When children move from one parent’s home to the other’s, existing child-support arrangements may need to be revised to reflect who is actually providing their care. An Indiana family dispute raised this issue after two daughters moved in with their father at different times and stopped visiting their mother, leading to disagreements over financial contributions, parenting-time credits and continuing support obligations.In a November 12, 2026, decision in Joseph E Foster v. Brigitte M Foster, available on Justia, the Indiana Court of Appeals partly reversed a lower court’s child-support calculations and directed it to enter a judgment of $15,275.16 in favour of the father. The appeals judges also reinstated the mother’s child-support responsibility, clarifying that a daughter’s refusal to maintain contact with her mother did not automatically end the mother’s obligation to provide financial support.
Daughters moved into father’s home
Joseph Foster and Brigitte Foster divorced in 2016 and initially shared joint physical and legal custody of their daughters, Alyson and Lauren. In November 2022, the mother received sole legal custody. The family arrangements changed on January 23, 2024, when Alyson moved into her father’s home and stopped visiting her mother. The parents agreed that child support should be recalculated from that date.Alyson began attending college in August 2024 and was subsequently treated as emancipated for support purposes. On August 12, 2025, Lauren also moved into her father’s home and stopped visiting her mother. The father then sought modifications to custody and child support. The parents eventually presented their competing calculations to the trial court in March 2026.
Parents disagreed over expenses and overnight visits
The father maintained that he had covered Alyson’s living expenses until her emancipation and was responsible for Lauren’s expenses after she moved in with him. The mother argued that she had continued contributing towards the children’s needs, including Lauren’s vehicle, mobile phone, medical expenses and college-credit courses. She also referred to school lunches, testing fees and other expenses she had previously paid.Another disagreement concerned parenting-time credits. The mother sought credit for 182 overnight visits with Lauren, arguing that the daughter’s decision to stop visiting was not her responsibility. The father disputed this claim, pointing out that Lauren had not spent any nights at her mother’s home after moving in with him. Both parents agreed that the father’s weekly income was $9,038 and the mother’s was $1,471.48.
Lower court found father had overpaid
The Lake Circuit Court divided the support calculations into three periods. It calculated that the father owed the mother $14,442 between January 23 and August 15, 2024, and another $29,640 between August 15, 2024, and August 12, 2025. For the period after Lauren moved in with her father, the court calculated an additional $12,123, while allowing the mother credit for 182 overnight visits.The court determined that the father’s total support obligation was $56,205 and that he had paid $60,568. It therefore found that he had overpaid by $4,363. The court also concluded that Lauren had repudiated her relationship with her mother without just cause and ended the mother’s future child-support obligation.
Appeals court rejects parenting-time credit
The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with the calculations for the first two periods but found that the lower court had made an error when calculating support after Lauren moved. The appeals judges noted that all three family members had acknowledged that Lauren had not spent any overnight visits with her mother after moving out.Under Indiana Child Support Guideline 6, parenting-time credits must reflect actual overnight stays. The mother could not receive credit for 182 visits that had never occurred. The court recalculated her weekly support obligation for the relevant 32-week period at $71.88, resulting in an additional $2,300.16 in the father’s favour.
Mother’s support obligation reinstated
The appeals court also disagreed with the decision to end the mother’s child-support responsibility because Lauren had rejected their relationship. It explained that a child’s repudiation of a parent may, in certain circumstances, affect that parent’s responsibility for college expenses. However, this does not automatically eliminate the separate obligation to provide child support. Relying on earlier Indiana decisions, including Bales v. Bales and Lovold v. Ellis, the court clarified that a child’s estrangement cannot by itself serve as a defence against an existing child-support obligation.The appeals court ultimately calculated the father’s overpayment at $15,275.16, based on a payment history showing that he had paid $57,057. It affirmed part of the lower court’s order, reversed the disputed portions and sent the case back for further proceedings to determine the mother’s remaining support obligation.
