The parties were divorced in January 2003 by a final decree incorporating their mediated settlement agreement. The settlement agreement provides, in pertinent part, that Husband will pay child support in the amount of $28,000 and that he will discharge his child support obligation by offsetting the amount Wife owed to Husband for his equitable interest in the marital home. Before the final decree was entered, however, Wife hired new counsel and filed a motion to set aside the agreement arguing that the child support provision improperly allows Husband to avoid his child support obligation by substituting an award of equity in real property for periodic support. Husband filed a motion seeking to enforce the mediated agreement. After a hearing, the trial court granted Husband’s motion and entered a final decree incorporating the mediated settlement agreement. Wife thereafter filed an application for discretionary appeal which we granted to determine whether the child support provision in the final decree constitutes a valid award of child support under OCGA § 19-6-15. The guidelines for computing the amount of child support are found in OCGA § 19-6-15 and must be considered by any court setting child support. Bradley v. Bradley , 270 Ga. 488 2 512 SE2d 248 1999. Where the parties agree to the amount of child support and the form in which it will be paid, the trial court remains obligated to review the child support award to determine whether such support is sufficient based on the child’s needs and the parent’s ability to pay. Swanson v. Swanson , 276 Ga. 566 1 SE2d 2003; Arrington v. Arrington , 261 Ga. 547 407 SE2d 758 1991. In making such determination, the trial court “is not bound by an agreement between the parties regarding child support nor is its obligation satisfied simply by adopting that agreement.” Id. The final decree must, inter alia, specify in what amount and in what manner the children are to receive support and provide specific written findings of the gross income of the parents and the presence or absence of special circumstances authorizing a deviation, if any, from the guideline percentages. OCGA § 19-6-15 a. See Eleazer v. Eleazer , 275 Ga. 482 569 SE2d 521 2002.
In compliance with OCGA § 19-6-15, the trial court must first calculate the amount of child support presumed to be sufficient by applying the applicable percentages to the parent’s gross income. OCGA § 19-6-15 b 5. Only then is it authorized to deviate from the guidelines and vary the final award either in amount or form. OCGA § 19-6-15 c. This procedure must be followed even where, as here, the parties have agreed between themselves to an award of child support and have presented that agreement to the trial court for approval. Swanson , supra, 276 Ga. at 567. After the court has made the required calculations, it may properly direct a parent to provide child support in a lump sum or to provide other forms of support, either direct or indirect, for the benefit of the children as “required by the ends of justice.” OCGA § 19-6-15 c 18. See Arrington , supra, 261 Ga. at 547 permitting lump sum child support; OCGA § 19-6-15 c 9 authorizing deviation based on “other support” party will provide, such as mortgage payment; OCGA § 19-6-15 c 16 authorizing deviation where party directed to pay cost of accident and sickness insurance coverage; OCGA § 19-6-34 a authorizing trier of fact to include as child support the provision of life insurance for benefit of minor child; Scherberger v. Scherberger , 260 Ga. 635 1 398 SE2d 363 1990 requirement that husband provide home for children is in nature of child support; Laney v. Winkles , 255 Ga. 709 341 SE2d 854 1986 requirement that husband make mortgage payments until child reaches majority is child support obligation. Accord Ehlers v. Ehlers , 264 Ga. 668 2 449 SE2d 840 1994 indirect costs paid by obligor can be considered to vary the final award of child support.
