examined the availability of a credit following the adoption of child support guidelines in In re Marriage of Callaghan, 19 Kan.App.2d 335, 869 P.2d 240 (1994). Addressing the noncustodial parent’s contention that due to his children’s receipt of social security disability dependency benefits, which were greater than his child support obligation, he was not required to pay child support, the court stated: “The husband’s rationale is unfounded because the amount of his child support obligation is specifically determined by the formula within the child support guidelines. Moreover, the state guidelines, not the provisions of the Social Security Act, define the husband’s child support obligation.” Id. at 337, 869 P.2d at 242 (citation omitted). See also Stultz, 659 N.E.2d at 128-29 (<HOLDING>). For these reasons and because the best
recognizing impact of child support guidelines holding prior to adoption of child support guidelines that a credit was discretionary holding trial court may consider social security disability dependency benefits received by the child and may deviate from the application of the child support guidelines if application of the guidelines is unjust or inappropriate holding that parents may not voluntarily terminate their rights in a child to avoid child support payments or contract away a child support obligation holding that it was error for the trial court to determine the issue of child support without a child support guidelines worksheet