ÿWPCX  ýmxðt¸mSzÜ[“ëVC$é‚ôwÀõmëÔ¶»Œ(ïlœc;i«ºO;çŒ|1?8tí§;_¤Ñ©éÁÏÆ®_gzÆf4Úç×.W⯘‰í@¸ìÔ©a£R­N7¬œpd,Ö`$(ÏÈiˆâiRbÂF·*I·÷=ÉhøòÇÀ@€äL×V’ù ÿ*£6«B:ž'‘ü»û"ð—àÇüS:,…©w’mK”x©ðÅ °—P“6vëËjd—ñz 'PÃr"^Î úni ÿì ›sbnZœèB ?A7}Â×0Á/ÊF3ai¶ 5 uñ£–u hcëÙLêñ/Ò©$púbþDG¦×‹¬`Ƌ縈sšcîÝdî\áX®…ÿ&²Ô½$6)%ýÇoåк²;#p* …‘g€€š™mÚ-ò¤sж±Ž0¢‘³Ó¢cuÓèÇËÉk›1ìr‰Ð¾Ì¦‚_^ö 7uÀâSõè¿ãE•Ó:„•¡ço©Ý“üøÚj}èêš`út•ÄÒÍÄ1¾‚²L8¾¤b2 hú‚ǯ͙n‹~íY¾›ŽÅÌìd-$<*ßBL¦ï­/EœI¼y=Óµ ùÈj§L–ꥷBýIŒxÎb %\UNb 0ˆ° 728U&Nj 0c¸ 1‡ z¢ Ò 72î 1‡ 72§ 1uÙ ÆN Æ ÆÚ Æ  0wfNÝ 0Šß 0 iE  1‡  72’ 0´Ä 0Çx 0Û? 0ï 0D -MU@z 0Dº^ þw 4"1 m3#ÁJU: EEEEEbMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM 0ëUUUU B@@ 0¤] D3 D-4 0Kaa AS¬Æÿ 0¤Å 0Di A«­»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó i)(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à0xCEKQW[_ekAutoList21.1.1.""1.1.1. ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt1.(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(b·¤$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xir$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#àhNÎCEIMQUY]aAutoList3""""""""i)1)a)"(ŒÜ$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(ŸF$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³Àô$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(ǵ{$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à(F$ïïà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àà0p(#(#àÔ2#ÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÙ Ù)Ô3  Ôà0Èp(#p(#àÙ Ù #Ñ#€CXÿÿd#Ñ(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóWr++s ÑB+ œ28s¡3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular - ù-(|G2­$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^í»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÿÍò»»Ô d(|3‰l$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^í»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‰l$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^í»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^í»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼^í»»»ÔÑ8€iXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îX$^íÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼^í»îîX$ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJuly€10,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔÌò òÔ#†¼^í»XXiò#ÔDANA€ALLANMORE€SMITHòòóó€v.€ANGELA€CHILDRESS€SMITHòòóóÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òA€Direct€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€95„08„0007€€€€€€The€Honorable€Carol€Catalano,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„02186„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€September€11,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XiXXXiÔà  àIn€this€post„divorce€proceeding,€wife€filed€petition€to€modify€the€prior€decree€as€to€childÐ xÈ  Ðsupport,€custody,€and€visitation.€€The€trial€court€modified€a€previous€consent€order€and€set€husbandððsÐ d´ Ðchild€support€with€an€upward€deviation€from€the€guidelines.€€Husband€appeals,€and€both€partiesÐ P  Ðpresent€issues€for€review.€€We€affirm€in€part,€reverse€in€part,€and€remand.Ð <Œ ÐÔ#†XiXXXiá#ÔÔ#†¼^í»XXir#ÔÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔÌÓÕÓÌò òTenn.R.App.P.€3;€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€Part,Ð P ÐReversed€in€Part€and€Remandedó óÐ ì< ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼^í»àXi#ÔÔ‡XiX.¼^íÔW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,€W.S.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,Ð Ä ÐJ.óó€and€òòHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ° ÐÌPenny€Harrington,€Nashville,€For€Appellant,€Dana€Allanmore€SmithÐ ˆØ ÐÌWende€J.€Rutherford,€Nashville,€For€Appellee,€Angela€Childress€SmithÐ `° ÐÓêÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼^í»XXi#ÔÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼^í»XXiå #ÔÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔÓ  ÓÑ€zãÑà  àAppellant,€Dana€Allanmore€Smith€(ð ðHusbandðð),€and€Appellee,€Angela€Childress€SmithÐ #`" Ð(ð ðWifeðð)€were€married€in€July€of€1990.€€On€July€23,€1996,€the€trial€court€entered€a€Final€JudgmentÐ ü#L# Ðof€Divorce€granting€a€divorce€to€the€parties€based€on€irreconcilable€differences.€€The€judgmentÐ è$8 $ Ðincorporated€a€Marital€Dissolution€Agreement€(ð ðMDAðð)€made€between€the€parties€providing€forÐ Ô%$!% Ðjoint€custody€of€the€partiesðð€only€child,€Daniel€Allan€Smith,€born€July€26,€1991.€€Husband€wasÐ À&"& Ðordered€to€pay€$575.00€per€month€during€the€periods€of€time€that€the€child€was€in€Wifeððs€primaryÐ ¬'ü"' Ðcare.€€Husband€was€awarded€primary€physical€custody€of€the€child€during€the€summer€months,€andÐ ˜(è#( Ðwas€to€have€no€child€support€obligation€during€that€time.€€Mother,€being€a€full€time€student,€had€noÐ „)Ô$) Ðchild€support€obligation€under€the€final€order.Ð p*À%* ÐÌà  àOn€October€17,€1997,€Wife€filed€Petition€to€Modify€the€Previous€Order€of€the€Court€assertingÐ H,˜', Ðthat€there€had€been€material€changes€in€circumstances€since€the€entry€of€the€Final€Judgment€ofÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÑzãÑâ âÑ8€iXXdìXXdì8Ñâ âÑ  ÑDivorce€and€execution€of€the€MDA€incorporated€therein.€€Wife€asserted€that€Husband€was€an€activeÐ ° Ðmember€of€the€United€States€Army€and€had€received€orders€to,€and€was€in€the€process€of€relocatingÐ œì Ðto€Virginia.€€Wife€contended€that€Husbandððs€new€post€was€approximately€eight€hours€traveling€timeÐ ˆØ Ðfrom€Wife,€as€opposed€to€the€current€distance€of€four€hours€traveling€time€between€Fort€Campbell,Ð tÄ ÐKentucky,€where€Husband€had€been€located€since€the€time€of€the€divorce,€and€€Knoxville,€Tennessee,Ð `° Ðwhere€Wife€resides.€€Wife€averred€that€the€parties€had€failed€to€communicate€civilly€and€effectivelyÐ L œ Ðand€had€numerous€disputes€regarding€visitation.€€Wife€disclosed€that€she€had€been€remarried€sinceÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€divorce,€and€despite€her€status€as€a€full€time€student,€had€been€able€to€generate€substantial€incomeÐ $ t Ðnot€contemplated€by€the€parties€at€the€time€of€the€divorce.€€Based€on€a€material€change€ofÐ  ` Ðcircumstances€including€the€change€in€the€location€of€Husband,€€Wife€requested€that€the€court€modifyÐ ü L  Ðthe€final€judgment€to€grant€her€sole€custody€of€the€child€with€reasonable€visitation€rights€forÐ è 8  ÐHusband.€€Wife€also€requested€that€the€current€child€support€of€$575.00€per€month€for€approximatelyÐ Ô$  Ðnine€months€be€modified€to€provide€for€regular,€year„round€monthly€child€support€as€required€by€theÐ À  ÐTennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€(ð ðchild€support€guidelinesðð)€and€be€calculated€based€onÐ ¬ü  ÐHusbandððs€increased€income.€€Wife€requested€that€she€be€entitled€to€claim€the€child€as€a€taxÐ ˜è  Ðdeduction€on€her€federal€income€tax€returns€commencing€with€tax€year€1997.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àHusband€answered€Wifeððs€petition€to€modify€and€filed€a€ð ðPetition€for€Contempt€and€€PetitionÐ \¬ Ðto€Change€Custody€or€in€the€Alternative€to€Modify€Visitation€and€Other€Provisions€of€the€FinalÐ H˜ ÐDecree€of€Divorce.ðð€€He€requested€that€the€court€award€custody€to€him€during€the€school€year€andÐ 4„ Ðorder€Wife€to€pay€child€support€during€that€time.€€The€parties€entered€into€mediation€and€offered€toÐ  p Ðthe€court€an€ð ðAgreement€between€Angela€Childress€and€Dana€Smith,ðð€modifying€the€terms€of€childÐ  \ Ðsupport€in€the€final€judgment.€€The€agreement€was€filed€and€entered€by€the€court€as€its€order€(ð ðagreedÐ øH Ðorderðð)€on€July€30,€1998,€and€reads€in€pertinent€part:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€€Effective€with€the€entry€of€this€Order,€ANGELA€CHILDRESSÐ ¼  Ðwill€assume€sole€and€exclusive€custody€of€the€partiesðð€minor€childÐ ¨ø ÐDaniel€Allan€Smith;Дä` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€The€medical€and€health€sponsorship€for€the€partiesðð€minor€childÐ l¼ Ðshall€be€assumed€by€Petitioner€Angela€Childress€and€her€husband€asÐ X ¨ Ðsoon€as€possible.€€In€the€event€this€is€not€possible,€€Respondent€DanaÐ D!” ÐAllanmore€Smith€shall€continue€sponsorship.€€All€medical€and€dentalÐ 0"€  Ðcosts€above€provided€by€basic€military€coverage€will€be€theÐ #l! Ðresponsibility€of€Petitioner€ANGELA€CHILDRESS;Ð$X"` x` x ÐÌÓ€ (NÎx3 Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àà  àà h à*à À à*à  à*Ðà%0!$` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à7.€€Petitioner€ANGELA€CHILDRESS€shall€open€a€college€fundÐ ¸'#& Ðfinancial€account€for€the€partiesðð€minor€child,€Daniel.€€The€accountÐ ¤(ô#' Ðshall€be€agreed€upon€between€the€parties,€with€Petitioner€ANGELAÐ )à$( ÐCHILDRESS€serving€as€custodian€of€the€account.€€Commencing€JuneÐ |*Ì%) Ð1,€1998,€Respondent€DANA€ALLANMORE€SMITH€will€depositÐ h+¸&* ÐTwo€Hundred€Sixty„Five€Dollars€($265.00)€per€month€into€theÐ ° Ðaccount€until€DANA€ALLANMORE€SMITH€has€deposited€a€totalÐ œì Ðamount€of€Thirty€Five€Thousand€Dollars€($35,000.00).€€CommencingÐ ˆØ ÐAugust€1,€2000,€Petitioner€ANGELA€CHILDRESS€shall€depositÐ tÄ ÐThree€Hundred€Twenty„Five€Dollars€($325.00)€per€month€into€thatÐ `° Ðaccount€until€ANGELA€CHILDRESS€has€deposited€a€total€of€ThirtyÐ L œ ÐFive€Thousand€Dollars€($35,000.00).€€The€Seventy€Thousand€DollarsÐ 8 ˆ Ð($70,000.00)€so€accumulated€will€be€held€for€the€benefit€of€theÐ $ t Ðpartiesðð€minor€child,€Daniel,€as€a€college€fund.€€In€the€event€of€theÐ  ` Ðdeath€of€either€parent€prior€to€the€fulfillment€of€their€respectiveÐ ü L  Ðobligation€to€this€fund,€that€parentððs€estate€will€be€responsible€forÐ è 8  Ðmaking€the€remaining€payments€to€meet€their€total€Thirty€FiveÐ Ô$  ÐThousand€Dollar€($35,000.00)€obligation.€€In€the€event€of€the€minorÐ À  Ðchildððs€death,€the€amount€accumulated€along€with€proratedÐ ¬ü  Ðappreciation€will€be€returned€to€each€parent.€€Petitioner€ANGELAÐ ˜è  ÐCHILDRESS€will€provide€Respondent€€DANA€ALLANMOREÐ „Ô  ÐSMITH€with€a€semi„annual€statement€of€the€account€balance.€€ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€order€further€provided€for€two€weeks€visitation€with€Husband€during€each€summer€andÐ H˜ Ðalternating€visitation€during€Christmas€vacation€and€spring€break.€€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  à€€€€On€March€31,€2000,€Wife€filed€€Petition€for€Modification€of€Child€Support€Ð \Ð Ð  Ðand€Visitation€wherein€she€averred€that€the€order€entered€on€July€30,€1998,€containing€modificationsÐ øH Ðof€child€support€was€not€based€on€any€change€or€variance€in€Husbandððs€income,€and€that€theÐ ä4 Ðprovision€which€relieved€Husband€of€his€obligation€to€pay€current€child€support€was€not€inÐ Ð  Ðcompliance€with€the€child€support€guidelines€or€any€justifiable€deviation€therefrom.€€Wife€assertedÐ ¼  Ðthat€Husband€had€not€exercised€his€visitation€as€set€out€in€the€order,€and€she€claimed€to€have€doneÐ ¨ø Ðnothing€to€interfere€with€his€visitation.€€Wife€requested€that€the€court€enter€an€order€requiringÐ ”ä ÐHusband€to€pay€current€child€support€pursuant€to€the€child€support€guidelines€and€that€the€courtÐ €Ð Ðprovide€for€specific€visitation€by€Husband.€€Wife€also€requested€her€attorneyððs€€fees€and€finally€thatÐ l¼ Ðan€order€be€issued€requiring€Husband€to€appear€and€show€cause€why€the€relief€sought€should€not€beÐ X ¨ Ðgranted.€Wife€subsequently€filed€an€Amended€Petition€for€Modification€of€Child€Support€andÐ D!” ÐVisitation€requesting€again€that€Husband€be€required€to€pay€child€support€pursuant€to€the€childÐ 0"€  Ðsupport€guidelines€and€that€the€support€be€retroactive€to€the€date€of€the€filing€of€the€original€petition,Ð #l! ÐMarch€31,€2000.€€Husband€filed€an€answer€requesting€that€Wifeððs€petition€be€dismissed.€€The€matterÐ $X" Ðwas€heard€on€August€l,€2000,€and€an€order€was€entered€August€31,€2000,€stating€in€part:Ð ô$D # ÐÌÓ€ (5h8xÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£.ÝÔ25hÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThe€parties€were€divorced€by€Final€Judgement€of€this݃3£._.ÝŒÐÌ&"%¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àCourt€entered€on€July€23,€1996.и'#&` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€Subsequent€to€the€Final€Judgment€of€Divorce€in€this€cause,€theÐ )à$( Ðparties€entered€into€a€mediated€agreement€modifying€the€FinalÐ |*Ì%) ÐJudgment€of€Divorce€which€was€accepted€and€made€the€Order€of€theÐ h+¸&* ÐCourt€on€July€30,€1998.€€Said€agreement€did€not€adequately€provideÐ ° Ðfor€the€best€interests€of€the€child€with€regard€to€child€support€in€thatÐ œì Ðthe€parities€did€not€apply€the€child€support€guidelines€promulgated€byÐ ˆØ Ðthe€Tennessee€Department€of€Human€Services€and€further,€there€is€aÐ tÄ Ðmaterial€change€in€circumstances€since€entry€of€the€Order€in€that€theÐ `° ÐFather€has€not€visited€as€contemplated€by€the€mediated€agreement.ÐL œ` x` x ÐÌÓ€ (x08 ÓØ! !Øà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€€Child€support€should€be€modified€to€comply€with€the€childÐ$ t` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€support€guidelines€promulgated€by€the€Tennessee€Department€ofÐ  ` ÐHuman€Services.€€The€Father€is€visiting€less€than€the€eighty€(80)€daysÐ ü L  Ðcontemplated€by€the€guidelines€and€there€should€therefore€be€anÐ è 8  Ðupward€deviation€from€the€minimum€amount€of€child€supportÐ Ô$  Ðrequired€by€the€guidelines.€The€Court€finds€that€Fatherððs€gross€incomeÐ À  Ðis€$5,775.23€per€month.€€The€Court€further€finds€that€child€supportÐ ¬ü  Ðshould€be€set€at€$861.00€per€month€beginning€August€2000€and€thatÐ ˜è  Ðthe€prior€Order€of€the€Court€should€be€modified€to€require€Father€toÐ „Ô  Ðpay€all€of€the€costs€of€transportation€for€visitation€and€all€medical€andÐ pÀ Ðdental€costs€not€covered€by€insurance€due€to€Fatherððs€failure€to€visit.Ð\¬` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.€€The€Court€finds€that€Father€should€be€relieved€of€his€obligation€toÐ 4„ Ðcontribute€$265.00€per€month€into€a€college€fund€but€that€MotherÐ  p Ðshould€be€bound€to€her€obligation€to€contribute€$325.00€per€month€toÐ  \ Ðthe€fund€until€such€time€as€she€has€contributed€an€amount€equal€to€theÐ øH Ðamount€previously€deposited€by€Father.€€All€other€provisionsÐ ä4 Ðregarding€this€fund€should€remain€in€full€force€and€effect.ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à5.€€The€Court€finds€that€the€visitation€should€not€be€modified€and€thatÐ ¨ø Ðthe€parties€should€be€required€to€comply€with€the€terms€of€theÐ ”ä Ðmediated€n€agreement€with€regard€to€visitation.€€€Ð€Ð` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à6.€€The€Court€finds€that€for€purposes€of€claiming€the€income€taxÐ X ¨ Ðdeduction,€the€parties€should€apply€the€rules€and€regulations€of€theÐ D!” ÐUnited€States€Internal€Revenue€Service€to€determine€which€partyÐ 0"€  Ðshould€receive€the€right€to€claim€the€child€as€a€deduction.Ð#l!` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€is€therefore€ò òORDERED,€ADJUDGED,€AND€DECREEDó óÐ ô$D # Ðthat€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€entered€July€30,€1998€shall€be€and€isÐ ä%4!$ Ðhereby€modified€as€follows:ÐÐ& "%` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€€Paragraph€2€of€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€shall€be€modified€andÐ ¨(ø#' ÐFather€shall€be€required€to€pay€all€medical€and€dental€costs€notÐ ”)ä$( Ðcovered€by€basic€military€coverage.Ѐ*Ð%)` x` x ÐÐ l+¼&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€Paragraph€3€of€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€shall€be€modified€andÐ ° Ðthe€parities€shall€apply€the€rules€and€regulations€of€the€United€StatesÐ œì ÐInternal€Revenue€Service€to€determine€which€party€should€receive€theÐ ˆØ Ðright€to€claim€the€child€as€a€tax€deduction.ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€€Paragraph€7€of€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€shall€be€modified€andÐ L œ ÐFather€shall€be€required€to€pay€current€child€support€in€the€amount€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ð$861.00€plus€a€lawful€commission€of€5%€for€a€total€of€$904.05€perÐ $ t Ðmonth€due€and€payable€on€the€5òòthóó€day€of€every€month€beginningÐ  ` ÐAugust€5,€2000.Ðü L ` x` x Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à*à À à*à  à*Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFather€shall€be€relieved€of€his€obligation€to€contribute€$265.00€perÐ ¬ü  Ðmonth€to€the€college€fund€established€by€Mother.€€However,€MotherÐ ˜è  Ðshall€be€required€to€continue€contributing€to€the€college€fund€asÐ „Ô  Ðrequired€by€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€except€that€her€obligationÐ pÀ Ðshall€be€modified€such€that€she€shall€only€be€required€to€contribute€anÐ \¬ Ðamount€equal€to€the€amount€already€deposited€by€Father.ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.€€Paragraph€8€(E)€of€the€prior€Order€of€the€Court€shall€be€modifiedÐ  p Ðand€Father€shall€be€required€to€pay€the€total€cost€of€transportation€forÐ  \ Ðvisitation.€€ÐøH` x` x ÐÌÓÓà  àHusband€appeals€the€order€of€the€trial€court€raising€three€issues€as€stated€in€his€brief:€€Ð Ð  ÐÓÓà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€admit€evidence€of€the€Ð ¨ø Ðcircumstances€impacting€the€existing€child€support€order€where€theÐ ”ä Ðdeviation€from€the€Tennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€was€theÐ €Ð Ðproduct€of€mediation€and€had€been€entered€as€an€order€of€the€court.Ðl¼` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€the€child€support€orderÐ D!” Ðpreviously€entered€by€the€court€containing€the€mediation€agreementÐ 0"€  Ðwas€void€and€unenforceable.Ð#l!` x` x ЀÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€[Whether]€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€admit€evidenceÐ ô$D # Ðconcerning€problems€with€visitation€and€thus€shifting€the€burden€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðproof€then€in€finding€the€failure€to€visit€to€be€a€material€change€inÐ Ì&"% Ðcircumstances.и'#&` x` x ÐÌWife€raises€an€additional€six€issues€on€appeal,€as€stated€in€her€brief:Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€make€an€upwardÐ ° Ðâ âdeviation€from€the€minimum€amount€of€child€support€required€by€theÐ œì ÐTennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€sufficient€to€compensate€MotherÐ ˆØ Ðfor€the€lack€of€visitation€by€Father.ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€relieving€Father€of€his€obligationÐ L œ Ðto€contribute€$265.00€per€month€to€the€partiesðð€childððs€college€fund.Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€relieve€Mother€of€herÐ  ` Ðobligation€to€contribute€$325.00€per€month€to€the€partiesðð€minorÐ ü L  Ðchildððs€college€fund€after€relieving€Father€of€his€obligation€toÐ è 8  Ðcontribute€to€the€partiesðð€childððs€college€fund.ÐÔ$ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€award€child€supportÐ ¬ü  Ðretroactive€to€the€date€of€the€filing€of€the€original€petition€forÐ ˜è  Ðmodification€of€child€support€and€visitation.Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à5.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€award€Mother€herÐ \¬ Ðreasonable€attorney€fees€at€trial.ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à6.€€Whether€Mother€is€entitled€to€her€reasonable€attorney€fees€onÐ  p Ðappeal.Ð \` x` x ÐÌÔ‡XiXXXiÔà  àSince€this€case€was€tried€by€the€trial€court€sitting€without€a€jury,€we€review€the€case€òòde€novoóóÐ ä4 Ðupon€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court.€€UnlessÐ Ð  Ðthe€evidence€preponderates€against€the€findings,€we€must€affirm,€absent€error€of€law.€€T.R.A.P.€13(d).Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àWe€will€address€€Husbandððs€first€and€second€issues€together,€as€both€question€the€trial€courtððsÐ ”ä Ðtreatment€of€the€July€30,€1998€order€incorporating€the€mediated€agreement.€€Husband€asserts€that€theÐ €Ð Ðtrial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€admit€evidence€concerning€the€circumstances€existing€in€1998€whichÐ l¼ Ðcaused€the€parties€to€enter€an€agreed€order€changing€custody€and€child€support€and€including€aÐ X ¨ Ðsignificant€deviation€from€the€child€support€guidelines.€€In€addition,€he€asserts€Ô#†XiXXXiÈP#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔthat€the€trial€courtÐ D!” Ðerred€in€ruling€that€the€agreed€order€was€void€and€unenforceable€as€to€child€support.Ô#†XiXXXiÂT#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔ€Wife€asserts€thatÐ 0"€  Ðthe€trial€court€correctly€refused€to€admit€parol€evidence€of€Husbandððs€state€of€mind€and€intent€at€theÐ #l! Ðtime€of€the€agreed€order.€€Wife€asserts€that€the€court€should€not€go€beyond€the€four€corners€of€theÐ $X" Ðdocument€to€discern€its€intended€purpose.ò òòòóóó óÔ#†XiXXXi‚U#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔ€€Wife€asserts€that€the€trial€court€did€not€hold€that€theÐ ô$D # Ðagreed€order€was€void€and€unenforceable,€but€rather€held€that€any€agreement€that€failed€to€apply€orÐ à%0!$ Ðreference€the€child€support€guidelines€as€to€a€personððs€responsibility€for€child€support€may€be€foundÐ Ì&"% Ðcontrary€to€public€policy.€€Wife€contends€that€the€trial€court€ultimately€modified€Husbandððs€childÐ ¸'#& Ðsupport€obligation€based€on€a€material€change€of€circumstances€in€that€he€was€not€visiting€the€childÐ ¤(ô#' Ðas€contemplated€by€the€agreed€order.€€Wife€further€asserts€that,€to€the€extent€that€the€agreed€orderÐ )à$( Ðrelieved€Husband€of€his€obligation€to€pay€child€support,€it€€should€be€found€voidÔ#†XiXXXiW#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔ€and€unenforceable.€Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àÔ#†XiXXXiXZ#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔAn€agreement€between€parties€to€a€divorce€regarding€the€legal€duty€of€child€support€overÐ h+¸&* Ðwhich€the€court€continues€to€have€statutory€power€to€modify,€loses€its€contractual€nature€whenÐ ° Ðmerged€into€a€divorce€decree.€€ò òòòPenland€v.€Penland,€óóó ó521€S.W.2d€222€(Tenn.€1975).€Ô#†XiXXXiÏZ#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔ€€The€childÐ œì Ðsupport€provision€of€an€agreement€must€merge€into€the€decree€and€lose€its€contractual€nature€to€allowÐ ˆØ Ðsubsequent€modification€of€child€support€payments€by€the€trial€court€when€changed€circumstancesÐ tÄ Ðjustify€such€modification.€€ò òòòBlackburn€v.€Blackburn,€óóó ó526€S.W.2d€463,€465€(Tenn.€1975).€€Were€itÐ `° Ðnot€so,€any€subsequent€modification€by€a€court€would€be€in€violation€of€the€constitutional€prohibitionÐ L œ Ðagainst€the€impairment€of€contractual€obligations.€€ò òòòId.€€óóó ó(citing€art.€I,€Ô#†XiXXXiM\#ÔÔ‡(XZ@ XXXiÔÔ#†(¼:1» X(XZ@C #ÔÔ‡(XZ@ X»(¼:1ÔððÔ#†XiX X(XZ@ì^#ÔÔ#†¼^í»XXi._#ÔÔ‡¼^í»»¼^íÔÔ‡XiX»¼^íÔ€20€of€the€TennesseeÐ 8 ˆ ÐConstitution,€ò òòòand€Whitt€v.€Whittóóó ó,€490€S.W.2d€159€(Tenn.€1973)).€€Ô#†XiXXXi—_#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔA€court€has€authority€to€order€theÐ $ t Ðpayment€of€child€support€by€a€parent€regardless€of€an€agreement€by€the€other€parent€to€the€contrary.€Ð  ` Ðò òòòDement€v.€Kitts,€óóó ó777€S.W.2d€33,€35€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àIn€òòò òÔ#†XiXXXin`#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔWitt€v.€Wittóóó ó,€929€S.W.2d€360€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996)€the€Eastern€Section€of€the€Court€ofÐ Ô$  ÐAppeals€Ô#†XiXXXiÓa#ÔÔ‡XiXXXiÔheld€that€a€provision€in€the€marital€dissolution€agreement€stating€that€the€€husband€was€notÐ À  Ðthe€father€of€a€minor€child€and€was€relieved€of€any€parental€responsibility€toward€the€child€was€voidÐ ¬ü  Ðas€against€public€policy.€€In€so€ruling€the€Court€stated:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€à ¸ àWe€do€not€find€it€necessary€under€the€circumstances€of€thisÐ pÀ Ðcase€to€address€the€issue€as€presented€by€the€appellant.€€We€find€andÐ \¬ Ðhold€that€the€original€provisions€of€the€marital€dissolution€agreementÐ H˜ Ðrelating€to€paternity€and€child€support€are€void€as€against€the€publicÐ 4„ Ðpolicy€of€this€state€and€that€the€court€may,€òòsua€sponteóó,€set€aside€a€voidÐ  p Ðorder€or€a€void€agreement€incorporated€within€an€order€or€decree.Ð \` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àDecrees€relating€to€child€custody€and€support€are€generallyÐ ä4 Ðviewed€as€conclusive€on€the€facts€in€existence€at€the€time€the€decisionÐ Ð  Ðwas€entered.€€ò òòòSee€Nichols€v.€Nichols,óóó ó€792€S.W.2d€713,€715-16Ð ¼  Ð(Tenn.1990).€€However,€the€entry€of€a€decree€does€not€necessarilyÐ ¨ø Ðpreclude€the€later€consideration€of€material€facts€that€were€not€fullyÐ ”ä Ðdeveloped€in€the€earlier€proceeding€because€of€concealment,€fraud,Ð €Ð Ðduress,€or€other€violations€of€public€policy€by€one€of€the€parties.Ð l¼ Ðò òòòRowles€v.€Reynoldsóóó ó,€29€Tenn.App.€224,€196€S.W.2d€76,€79€(1946);€Ð X ¨ Ð4€Family€Law€Practice€(MB)€ðð€52.02(1)(h)€(1989).€€ò òòòSee€alsoóóó óÐ D!” Ðò òòòFaircloth€v.€Lockeóóó ó,€an€unreported€opinion€of€this€court€(1991).€€ò òWeÐ 0"€  Ðare€prepared€to€go€one€step€further€and€hold€that€a€violation€ofÐ  #p! Ðthe€public€policy€of€this€state€by€òòbothóó€parties€justifies€the€court€inÐ  $\" Ðvoiding€the€offending€parts€of€the€decree,€where,€on€its€face,€theÐ ø$H # Ðdecree€shows€a€violation€of€the€public€policy€of€this€state.€€AnÐ ä%4!$ Ðevidentiary€hearing,€under€such€circumstances,€is€not€necessary.ó ó€Ð Ð& "% ÐNo€amount€of€evidence€can€transform€a€void€order,€agreement€orÐ À'#& Ðdecree€into€one€possessing€any€legal€efficacy.Ь(ü#'` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€seems€abundantly€clear€that€since€time€immemorial€it€hasÐ „*Ô%) Ðbeen€the€public€policy€of€this€state€that€a€parent€is€under€a€duty€toÐ p+À&* Ðsupport€his€children.€€Indeed,€it€has€been€declared€a€criminal€offenseÐ ° Ðby€the€legislature€for€a€parent€to€knowingly€fail€to€support€hisÐ œì Ðchildren.€€Further€evidence€of€the€public€policy€of€the€State€asÐ ˆØ Ðestablished€by€our€legislature€may€be€found€in€€T.C.A.ðððð€36-2-101,Ð tÄ Ðet€seq.,€(paternity€proceedings)€and€€T.C.A.€ðððð€36-5-101€requiringÐ `° Ðparents€to€support€their€children€and€by€the€adoption€of€the€childÐ L œ Ðsupport€guidelines€promulgated€by€the€Department€of€HumanÐ 8 ˆ ÐServices.Ð$ t` x` x ÐÌòòò ò€Witt€ó óóó929€S.W.2d€at€362€(emphasis€added).€€In€making€a€determination€concerning€the€appropriateÐ ü L  Ðamount€of€child€support,€a€trial€court€should€apply,€as€a€rebuttable€presumption,€the€child€supportÐ è 8  Ðguidelines.€€ò òòòAdams€v.€Reed,€óóó ó874€S.W.2d€61,€63€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993)€T.C.A.€ðð€36„5„101(e)(1).€€€ToÐ Ô$  Ðdeviate€from€the€presumptive€amount,€a€court€must€enter:Ð À  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA€written€or€specific€finding€on€the€record€that€the€application€of€theÐ ˜è  Ðguidelines€would€be€unjust€or€inappropriate€in€a€particular€case...inÐ „Ô  Ðorder€to€provide€for€the€best€interest€of€the€child€or€the€equity€betweenÐ pÀ Ðthe€parties€and€the€court€must€show€what€the€child€support€awardÐ \¬ Ðwould€have€been€without€the€deviation.€ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Ô_ÔComp.RÔ_Ô€&€Regs.€1240„2„4„.01(2)(3),€1240„2„2„.02(7)(1994);€òòò òsee€also€ó óóóT.C.A.€ðð€36„5„Ð  p Ð101(e)(1).€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àHusband€agues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€investigated€why€the€trial€court€deviated€fromÐ ä4 Ðthe€amount€of€child€support€provided€for€in€the€guidelines€by€incorporating€the€mediated€agreementÐ Ð  Ðin€the€July€30,€1998€order.€€In€the€August€31,€2000€order,€the€trial€court€held€in€part€that:€ð ð[the]Ð ¼  Ðagreement€did€not€adequately€provide€for€the€best€interests€of€the€child€with€regard€to€child€supportÐ ¨ø Ðin€that€the€parties€did€not€apply€the€child€support€guidelines€promulgated€by€the€TennesseeÐ ”ä ÐDepartment€of€Human€Services....ðð€€€The€trial€court€ordered€modification€of€paragraph€7€of€the€order,Ð €Ð Ðsetting€out€provisions€for€a€college€fund€and€terms€by€which€the€parties€shall€contribute.€€The€trialÐ l¼ Ðcourt€required€€Husband€to€pay€current€child€support€in€the€amount€of€$861.00€pursuant€to€the€childÐ X ¨ Ðsupport€guidelines,€plus€a€commission€of€5%€to€the€clerk€and€master€of€the€court.€€In€finding€that€theÐ D!” Ðagreed€order€did€not€provide€for€the€childððs€best€interest,€the€trial€court€implicitly€found€that€theÐ 0"€  Ðprovisions€regarding€Husbandððs€legal€obligation€to€pay€child€support€were€against€public€policy€andÐ #l! Ðtherefore€void.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àThe€provision€having€to€do€with€Husbandððs€legal€duty€to€support€his€child€remains€under€theÐ à%0!$ Ðauthority€of€the€court€and€loses€its€contractual€nature€upon€incorporation€into€a€court€order.€€BecauseÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€previous€order€did€not€make€reference€to€the€Tennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€and€did€notÐ ¸'#& Ðfollow€the€mandated€method€of€determining€child€support,€the€trial€court€was€correct€in€finding€thatÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€order€was€against€public€policy€and€was€therefore€void.€€In€agreement€with€the€Eastern€SectionððsÐ )à$( Ðruling€in€ò òòòWitt,€óóó ó929€S.W.2d€at€363,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€was€free€to€so€rule€without€anÐ |*Ì%) Ðevidentiary€hearing.€€Therefore,€we€find€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€abandonment€of€the€provisionÐ h+¸&* Ðdealing€with€Husbandððs€child€support€obligations,€and€no€error€in€having€done€so€without€anÐ ° Ðevidentiary€hearing.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€Husbandððs€third€issue,€he€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€admit€evidenceÐ tÄ Ðconcerning€problems€with€visitation,€and€in€finding€that€the€failure€to€visit€was€a€material€change€inÐ `° Ðcircumstances.€€In€the€August€31,€2000€order,€the€trial€court€found€that,€although€the€mediatedÐ L œ Ðagreement€was€made€an€order€of€the€court,€it€did€not€adequately€provide€for€the€best€interest€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðchild€€as€the€parties€did€not€apply€the€child€support€guidelines.€€In€addition,€the€court€found€that€thereÐ $ t Ðwas€a€material€change€in€circumstances€since€the€entry€of€the€agreed€order€in€that€€Husband€had€notÐ  ` Ðvisited€as€contemplated€by€the€agreement.€€The€trial€court€held€that€since€Husband€was€visiting€lessÐ ü L  Ðthan€the€eighty€(80)€days€contemplated€by€the€guidelines,€there€should€be€an€upward€deviation€fromÐ è 8  Ðthe€minium€amount€of€child€support€required.€€On€that€basis,€the€trial€court€set€the€child€supportÐ Ô$  Ðaccording€to€the€guidelines€at€$861.00€plus€a€5%€commission€per€month€to€be€paid€by€Husband.€€TheÐ À  Ðtrial€court€further€ordered€that€Husband€would€be€responsible€for€all€costs€of€transportation€forÐ ¬ü  Ðvisitation,€and€all€medical€and€dental€costs,€thereby€providing€an€upward€deviation€from€theÐ ˜è  Ðminimum€amount€contemplated€by€the€guidelines.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  à€The€guidelines€state€that€the€court€"shall"€increase€the€award€if€the€obligor€is€not€providingÐ \¬ Ðhealth€insurance,€if€the€obligor€is€exercising€less€than€average€visitation,€if€extraordinary€medical€andÐ H˜ Ðeducational€expenses€exist,€or€if€the€court€finds€that€equity€requires€it.€€Tenn.€Comp.R.€&€Regs.€Ð 4„ Ð1240-2-4-.04(1).€In€addressing€the€issue€of€child€support€where€the€father€had€not€visited€asÐ  p Ðcontemplated€by€agreement,€this€Court€stated:€òòò ò€óóó óÐ  \ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€Guidelines€allow€an€upward€deviation€where€the€non-custodialÐ ä4 Ðspouse€exercises€"less€than€average€overnight€visitation."€€€TheÐ Ð  ÐGuidelines€state:м ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThese€guidelines€are€designed€to€apply€to€situations€where€childrenÐ ”ä Ðare€living€primarily€with€one€parent€but€stay€overnight€with€the€otherÐ €Ð Ðparentòò€at€least€as€oftenóó€as€every€other€weekend€from€Friday€toÐ l¼ ÐSunday,€two€weeks€in€the€summer€and€two€weeks€during€holidaysÐ X ¨ Ðthroughout€the€year....€€In€situations€where€overnight€time€is€dividedÐ D!” Ðmore€equally€between€the€parents,€the€courts€will€have€to€make€a€caseÐ 0"€  Ðby€case€determination€as€to€the€appropriate€amount€of€support.€€Ð #l! Ð(Emphasis€added.)€Ð$X"` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€tit.€10,€ch.€1240-2-4-.02(6)(7).€Ð à%0!$ ÐSimilarly,€where€overnight€time€is€divided€òòless€óóequally€between€theÐ Ì&"% Ðparents,€the€support€award€should€be€adjusted€appropriately.и'#&` x` x Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Guidelines€further€provide€that€since€the€percentageÐ )à$( Ðawards€in€the€Guidelines€are€a€minimum€the€court€òòshallóó€increase€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðchild€support€award€for€the€following€reasons:Ðh+¸&*` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIf€the€child(ren)€is/are€not€staying€overnight€with€the€obligor€for€theÐ ° Ðaverage€visitation€period€of€every€other€weekend€from€Friday€eveningÐ œì Ðto€Sunday€evening,€two€weeks€during€the€summer€and€two€weeksÐ ˆØ Ðduring€holiday€periods€throughout€the€year,€then€an€amount€shall€beÐ tÄ Ðadded€to€the€percentage€calculated€in€the€above€rule€to€compensateÐ `° Ðthe€obligee€for€the€cost€of€providing€care€for€the€child(ren)€for€theÐ L œ Ðamount€of€time€during€the€average€visitation€period€that€the€child(ren)Ð 8 ˆ Ðare€not€with€the€obligor.Ð$ t` x` x ÐÌÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTenn.Comp.R.€&€Regs.€tit.€10,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(1)(b).€Ð è 8  ÐCertainly€the€rationale€contained€in€these€provisions€is€equallyÐ Ô$  Ðapplicable€where€child€support€paymentsòò€below€óóthe€Guideline€amountÐ À  Ðhave€been€awarded.Ьü ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTrial€exhibits€establish€that€Husband€requested€approximatelyÐ „Ô  Ðtwenty€hours€of€visitation€in€January€of€1994,€and€approximatelyÐ pÀ Ðforty-five€hours€of€visitation€in€April€1994.€€Husband€testified€that,€inÐ \¬ Ðthe€four€years€since€the€parties'€divorce,€Husband€kept€the€children€forÐ H˜ Ðone€or€two€weekends.€€He€has€taken€the€children€on€a€single,€oneÐ 4„ Ðweek€vacation€during€three€of€the€last€four€years.€€He€has€never€keptÐ  p Ðhis€children€for€over€one€week€during€a€single€year.Ð \` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àWhile€we€recognize€that€Husband's€irregular€schedule€as€aÐ ä4 Ðpilot€prevents€him€from€exercising€some€visitation€and€that,€at€times,Ð Ð  ÐWife€has€made€it€difficult€for€Husband€to€see€the€children,€we€stressÐ ¼  Ðthat€the€best€interest€of€the€children€is€this€Court's€paramount€concern.ò òòò€Ð ¨ø ÐSee,€e.g.óóó ó€Tenn.Comp.R.€&€Regs.€tit.€10,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(5);€€Ð ”ä Ðòòò òContreras€v.€Ward,ó óóó€831€S.W.2d€288,€289€(Tenn.App.1991).€Ð €Ð ÐWhatever€the€reasons€may€be€that€Husband€does€not€see€his€childrenÐ l¼ Ðfor€significant€periods,€the€fact€remains€that€the€children€need€to€beÐ X ¨ Ðsupported.€€If€the€children€are€constantly€in€the€care€of€Wife,€theÐ D!” Ðamount€of€child€support€Wife€receives€should€reflect€the€true€state€ofÐ 0"€  Ðaffairs.€€Tenn.Comp.R.€&€Regs.€tit.€10,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(1)(b).Ð#l!` x` x ÐÌòòò òDwight€v.€Dwightó óóó,€936€S.W.2d€945,€949€(Ô_ÔTenn.Ct.AppÔ_Ô.€1996)Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  à€Regarding€the€upward€deviation€of€child€support€due€to€lack€of€visitation,€€Husband€arguesÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€allowing€evidence€regarding€the€circumstances€of€his€visitation,Ð ¸'#& Ðhowever€he€failed€to€make€an€offer€of€proof.€€€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌ€€€à  àGenerally,€an€offer€of€proof€is€required€to€preserve€an€issue€for€appeal.€€In€the€absence€of€aÐ |*Ì%) Ðstatement€of€the€substance€of€the€evidence€or€an€offer€of€proof,€the€issue€as€to€the€correctness€of€theÐ h+¸&* Ðexclusion€of€evidence€is€not€reviewable€on€appeal.€€òòò òRutherford€v.€Rutherford,ó óóó€971€S.W.2d€955,€€956Ð ° Ðòòò òó óóó(Tenn.€Ct€.App.€1997);òòò ò€seeó óóó€Tenn.€R.€€Evid.€103(a)(2).€€Although€€Husband€made€no€offer€of€proofÐ œì Ðto€preserve€evidence€of€visitation€for€review€on€appeal,€we€believe€that€an€offer€of€proof€is€notÐ ˆØ Ðneeded€in€this€case€because€the€substance€of€the€evidence€and€reasons€for€admission€were€apparent.€Ð tÄ Ѐò òòòSee€State€v.€Hall,€óóó ó958€S.W.2d€679,€691€n.10€(Tenn.€1997);€and€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€103(a)(2).€€€TheÐ `° ÐHusbandððs€previous€responses€regarding€visitation€and€Wifeððs€claims€in€her€petition€reveal€theÐ L œ Ðsubstance€of€the€excluded€testimony.€€€€In€addition,€although€the€trial€court€stated€that€evidence€asÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€the€impossibility€of€performance€under€the€provisions€of€the€mediated€settlement€was€immaterial,Ð $ t Ðthe€record€contains€testimony€from€Husband€that€visitation€had€been€difficult,€and€that€on€oneÐ  ` Ðoccasion€Wife€refused€to€pay€50€%€of€the€fee€for€a€change€in€an€airline€ticket€as€agreed.€€HusbandÐ ü L  Ðfurther€testified€that€he€missed€last€summerððs€visitation€due€to€Wifeððs€refusal€to€allow€the€child€toÐ è 8  Ðvisit€at€any€time€other€than€when€Husband€would€be€involved€in€relocation,€and€that€he€was€uncertainÐ Ô$  Ðof€his€living€arrangements.€€Therefore,€we€believe€that€we€may€consider€the€question€as€put€beforeÐ À  Ðus€by€Husband.€€€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAt€the€August€1,€2000€hearing,€Husband€testified€to€have€only€visited€his€child€for€4€ðð€hoursÐ „Ô  Ðin€the€preceding€18€months.€€It€is€apparent€that€Husband€has€not€exercised€visitation€as€contemplatedÐ pÀ Ðby€either€the€agreement€or€the€child€support€guidelines.€While€we€acknowledge€that€HusbandððsÐ \¬ Ðmilitary€career€involving€relocation€may€have€prevented€visitation€with€his€child€to€some€degree,€andÐ H˜ Ðrecognize€that€there€may€have€been€difficulty€between€the€parties€in€making€visitation€arrangements,Ð 4„ Ðthe€fact€remains€that,€for€what€ever€reasons,€Husband€failed€to€visit€the€child€for€a€significant€periodÐ  p Ðof€time,€and€that€the€child€needs€to€be€supported.€€If€the€child€is€constantly€in€the€care€of€Wife,€theÐ  \ Ðamount€of€child€support€that€she€receives€should€reflect€the€same.€€ò òòòSee€Dwight,€ó óóó936€S.W.2d€at€949.€Ð øH ЀBecause€the€basis€of€an€upward€deviation€in€child€support€is€not€the€reasonableness€of€the€lack€ofÐ ä4 Ðvisitation,€but€€instead€aimed€at€the€protection€of€the€best€interest€of€the€child,€€we€think€that€the€trialÐ Ð  Ðcourt's€exclusion€of€this€testimony€was€not€error.€€òòò òó óóóÐ ¼  ÐÌà  àThe€guidelines€provide€that€if€a€child€is€not€staying€overnight€with€the€obligor€for€the€averageÐ ”ä Ðvisitation€period,€every€other€weekend€,€two€weeks€during€the€summer,€and€an€additional€two€weeksÐ €Ð Ðduring€holiday€periods,€ð ðthen€an€amount€shall€be€added€to€the€percentage€calculated€...to€compensateÐ l¼ Ðthe€obligee€for€the€cost€of€providing€care....ðð€€It€does€not€appear€that€the€trial€court€followed€theseÐ X ¨ Ðdirectives€in€providing€for€the€upward€deviation€in€child€support.€€We€therefore€vacate€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourtððs€order€as€to€the€amount€of€child€support€and€as€to€an€upward€deviation€in€the€form€ofÐ 0"€  ÐHusbandððs€full€responsibility€for€transportation,€medical€and€dental€expenses.€€On€remand€the€trialÐ #l! Ðcourt€shall€make€a€determination€as€to€an€upward€deviation€in€child€support€based€on€the€directiveÐ $X" Ðof€the€guidelines€that€Wife€be€compensated€for€the€cost€of€providing€for€the€care€of€the€child€for€theÐ ô$D # Ðamount€of€time€during€the€average€visitation€period€that€the€child€is€not€with€Husband.€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àòòò òó óóóThe€Wifeððs€first€issue€addresses€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€modifying€the€requirementÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€the€parties€split€the€cost€of€transportation€for€visitation€in€lieu€of€increasing€Husbandððs€childÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsupport€obligation€beyond€the€minimum€required€child€support€guidelines.€€As€previously€stated,€onÐ )à$( Ðâ âremand€the€trial€should€revisit€the€issue€of€an€upward€deviation€and€calculate€child€support€accordingÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€the€guidelines.€€In€addition,€the€trial€court€should€consider€the€division€of€visitation€expenses€inÐ ° Ðlight€of€the€amount€of€child€support€determined€on€remand.€€€à È àÐ œì Ðâ âÌà  àIn€her€second€and€third€issues,€Wife€addresses€the€trial€courtððs€treatment€of€the€partiesððÐ tÄ Ðobligations€regarding€the€childððs€college€fund.€€Wife€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€relievingÐ `° ÐHusband€of€his€obligation€to€contribute€$265.00€per€month€to€the€childððs€college€fund,€while€refusingÐ L œ Ðto€relieve€her€of€her€obligation€to€contribute€$325.00€per€month€to€the€fund.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àParagraph€7€of€the€agreed€order€provides€for€the€establishment€of€a€college€fund€into€whichÐ  ` ÐHusband€is€to€contribute€$265.00€per€month€until€he€has€deposited€a€total€of€$35,000.00€into€theÐ ü L  Ðaccount.€€The€agreed€order€further€provides€that€commencing€August€1,€2000,€Wife€is€to€contributeÐ è 8  Ð$325.00€per€month€into€the€same€fund.€€Paragraph€11€states€that€the€terms€of€the€agreementÐ Ô$  Ðsupersede€paragraphs€2€through€9,€14,€18,€and€24€of€the€MDA€incorporated€into€the€partiesðð€FinalÐ À  ÐJudgment€of€Divorce.€€The€designated€paragraphs€€include€terms€addressing:€custody,€visitation,Ð ¬ü  Ðvisitation€schedule,€visitation€ground€rules,€medical€and€academic€reports,€child€support,€medicalÐ ˜è  Ðexpenses,€tax€deductions,€and€college€fund.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àOnly€the€portions€of€the€agreement€between€Husband€and€Wife€regarding€the€legal€duty€toÐ \¬ Ðsupport€a€child€or€alimony,€over€which€the€court€has€continuing€statutory€authority€to€modify€loseÐ H˜ Ðtheir€contractual€nature€when€merged€into€a€decree€of€divorce.€€€ò òòòPenland,€óóó ó521€S.W.2d€at€224.€€€In€ò òòòÐ 4„ ÐPenland,€ó óóóparties€to€a€divorce€had€entered€into€an€agreement€whereby€the€husband€assumedÐ  p Ðresponsibility€for€the€future€educational€expenses€of€the€partiesðð€child€after€high€school.€€òòò òId.€€ó óóóat€224.€Ð  \ ÐTennessee€Supreme€Court€stated:€€€€Ð øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€authority€of€the€courts€to€order€child€support€and,€ifÐ Ð  Ðnecessary,€to€enforce€same€by€the€process€of€contempt,€is€statutory,Ð ¼  Ðand€generally€exists€only€during€minority....€When€the€husband€andÐ ¨ø Ðwife€contract€with€respect€to€the€legal€duty€of€child€support,€uponÐ ”ä Ðapproval€of€that€contract,€the€agreement€of€the€parties€becomesÐ €Ð Ðmerged€into€the€decree€and€loses€its€contractual€nature.Ðl¼` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à*à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à*à0À(#À(#àà0p(#(#à*ÐD!”p(#p(# ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIt€follows,€and€we€so€hold,€that€only€that€portion€of€a€propertyÐ #l! Ðsettlement€agreement€between€husband€and€wife€dealing€with€theÐ $X" Ðlegal€duty€of€child€support,€or€alimony€over€which€the€court€hasÐ ô$D # Ðcontinuing€statutory€power€to€modify,€loses€its€contractual€natureÐ à%0!$ Ðwhen€merged€into€a€decree€for€divorce.€ÐÌ&"%` x` x ÐÌòòò òÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ô€ó óóó€521€S.W.2d€at€224.€€In€applying€this€principle,€the€Court€in€ò òòòRichardson€v.€Richardson,óóó ó€969Ð ¤(ô#' ÐS.W.2d€931,€934€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997)€found€that€a€trial€court€had€the€authority€to€make€changesÐ )à$( Ðto€a€trust€instrument€where€funding€the€trust€was€part€of€a€fatherððs€legal€obligation,€notwithstandingÐ |*Ì%) Ðany€language€of€the€trust€instrument€to€the€contrary.€€However,€the€Court€noted€that€the€provisionsÐ h+¸&* Ðof€the€trust€that€were€not€part€of€the€duty€of€child€support€retained€their€contractual€nature.€€ò òòòId.€€óóó óatÐ ° Ð935.€€Where€a€parent€contracts€to€extend€his€obligation€to€support€his€child€beyond€the€age€ofÐ œì Ðminority,€the€agreement€will€be€enforceable€as€a€contractual€obligation€even€after€incorporation€intoÐ ˆØ Ða€divorce€decree.€€ò òòòBlackburn€v.€Blackburn,€ó óóó526€S.W.2d€at€465.òòò ò€óóó ó€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àAccording€to€the€principles€of€the€interpretation€of€contracts,€the€parties€intentions€should€beÐ L œ Ðascertained€considering€the€entire€contract€and€giving€words€their€usual,€natural€and€ordinaryÐ 8 ˆ Ðmeaning.€€ò òòòRainey€v.€Stansell,€óóó ó836€S.W.2d€117,€118„19€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€In€the€absence€ofÐ $ t Ðfraud€or€mistake,€a€contract€will€be€enforced€as€written€despite€the€fact€that€it€contains€terms€that€laterÐ  ` Ðappear€harsh€or€unjust.€€ò òòòCooper€v.€Cooper,€óóó óNo.€W1999„01450„COA„R3„CV,€2001€WL€29459€€*3Ð ü L  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jan.€10,€2001)€(citing€ò òòòAllstate€Ins.€Co.€v.€Wilson,€óóó ó856€S.W.2d€706,€708€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð è 8  ÐApp.€1992);€T.C.A.€ðð€47„50„112€(1995)).€€Additionally,€courts€do€not€rewrite€contracts€where€a€partyÐ Ô$  Ðunwisely€agreed€to€a€term€therein.€€ò òòòId.€€à À àóóó óÐ À  ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€the€terms€of€the€agreed€order€state€that€the€terms€contained€thereinÐ ˜è  Ðsupercede€those€of€the€final€order€thereby€replacing€Husbandððs€duty€to€provide€child€support€withÐ „Ô  Ða€duty€to€contribute€$265.00€per€month€to€a€college€fund.€€The€trial€court€has€determined€thatÐ pÀ ÐHusbandððs€child€support€obligation€should€be€calculated€according€to€the€child€support€guidelines,Ð \¬ Ða€ruling€with€which€we€agree.€€Husbandððs€legal€obligation€has€always€remained€and€continues€toÐ H˜ Ðremain€under€the€authority€of€the€court€to€modify€in€accordance€with€the€law€and€in€keeping€with€theÐ 4„ Ðbest€interest€of€the€child.€€€However,€Wifeððs€obligation€under€the€contract€retains€its€contractualÐ  p Ðnature,€as€it€does€not€involve€any€legal€obligation.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€merely€requires€that€WifeÐ  \ Ðcontinue€monthly€payments€until€ð ðshe€has€contributed€an€amount€equal€to€the€amount€previouslyÐ øH Ðdeposited€by€Father.ðð€€We€do€not€believe€that€the€court€erred€in€this€ruling,€and€therefore€find€itsÐ ä4 Ðdecision€with€regard€to€the€childððs€college€fund€equitable.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àNext,€Wife€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€award€child€support€retroactive€to€theÐ ¨ø Ðdate€of€the€filing€of€the€original€petition€for€modification€of€child€support€and€visitation.€€Wife€assertsÐ ”ä Ðthat€the€right€to€support€lies€in€a€minor€child€and€cannot€be€waived.€€The€trial€court€refused€to€grantÐ €Ð ÐWife€retroactive€child€support€stating€that€both€parties€entered€into€the€mediated€settlement€whichÐ l¼ Ðdid€not€meet€the€requirements€of€the€law.€€€€€€€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àT.C.A.€ðð€36-5-101(a)(5)€(Supp.€2000)€reads€in€part:Ð 0"€  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à€Any€order€for€child€support€shall€be€a€judgment€entitled€to€beÐ $X" Ðenforced€as€any€other€judgment€of€a€court€of€this€state€and€shall€beÐ ô$D # Ðentitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€in€this€state€and€in€any€other€state.€Ð à%0!$ ÐSuch€judgments€shall€not€be€subject€to€modification€as€to€any€timeÐ Ì&"% Ðperiod€or€any€amounts€due€prior€to€the€date€that€an€action€forÐ ¸'#& Ðmodification€is€filed€and€notice€of€the€action€has€been€mailed€to€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðlast€known€address€of€the€opposing€parties.€.€.€.Ð)à$(` x` x Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àCourts€have€broad€discretion€in€determining€the€amount€of€retroactive€child€support€awards.€Ð ° Ðâ âòòò òState€ex€rel.€Coleman€v.€Clay,ó óóó€805€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€1991).€€However,€the€court's€discretionÐ œì Ðin€setting€the€amount€of€retroactive€child€support€is€limited.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€legislature€has€provided€for€retroactive€awards€by€statuteÐ `° Ðand€by€the€incorporation€of€the€Child€Support€GuidelinesÐ L œ Ðpromulgated€by€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Human€Services,€ChildÐ 8 ˆ ÐSupport€Services€Division.€€Retroactive€child€support€is€availableÐ $ t Ðwhether€the€child€is€a€minor€or€whether€the€child€has€reached€the€ageÐ  ` Ðof€majority€and€brings€the€claim€within€time€permitted€by€the€statute.€Ð ü L  ЀTenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€36-2-103(b)(1)€(repealed€in€1997;€correspondingÐ è 8  Ðsection€at€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€36-2-306).€€Furthermore,€courts€areÐ Ô$  Ðrequired€to€apply€the€Child€Support€Guidelines€as€a€rebuttableÐ À  Ðpresumption€in€determining€support,€and€the€1994€guidelinesÐ ¬ü  Ðexplicitly€provide€"that€the€rebuttable€presumption€must€be€applied€toÐ ˜è  Ðall€child€support€awards€òòeven€if€the€order€is€being€sought€for€aÐ „Ô  Ðretroactive€period€before€October€13,€1989.óó€€"€Tenn.Comp.R.€&Ð pÀ ÐRegs.€ch.€1240-2-4-.01(2)€(emphasis€added).€€This€Court€has€held€thatÐ \¬ Ðthe€guidelines€"carry€what€amounts€to€a€legislative€mandate."€€€òòò òNashÐ H˜ Ðv.€Mulleó óóó,€846€S.W.2d€803,€804€(Tenn.1993).€€Ð4„` x` x ÐÌòòò òÔ_ÔBerryhillÔ_Ô€v.€Rhodes,€ó óóóNo.€€W1997„00167„SC„R11„CV,€2000€WL€688789€*4€(Tenn.€May€30,€2000).€Ð  \ ÐThus,€while€the€courts€continues€to€have€discretion€in€making€awards€of€child€support,€that€discretionÐ øH Ðis€to€be€carried€out€within€the€strictures€of€the€Child€Support€Guidelines.€€òòò ò€Tallent€v.€Cates,óóó ó€E1999„Ð ä4 Ð01168„COA„R3„CV,€2000€WL€823466€€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€27,€2000)Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€award€retroactive€child€support€was€based€on€the€fact€that€bothÐ ¨ø Ðparties€participated€in€mediation€and€agreed€to€the€provisions€incorporated€in€the€order.€€We€believeÐ ”ä Ðthat€€partiesðð€participation€in€the€agreement€is€not€an€appropriate€consideration€in€determining€if€WifeÐ €Ð Ðshould€be€awarded€retroactive€child€support.€€In€accordance€with€T.C.A.€ðð€36-5-101(a)(5)€and€caseÐ l¼ Ðlaw,€we€reverse€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€with€regard€to€retroactive€child€support.€€On€€remand,Ð X ¨ Ðretroactive€child€support€shall€be€awarded€according€to€the€guidelines€March€31,€2000,€the€date€ofÐ D!” ÐWifeððs€filing€of€the€petition€to€modify€child€support€and€visitation.€€In€addition€and€as€a€matter€ofÐ 0"€  Ðequity,€Husband€should€receive€credit€against€any€retroactive€child€support€owed€in€the€amount€thatÐ #l! Ðhe€has€deposited€into€the€college€fund€in€lieu€of€child€support€since€the€date€of€the€filing€of€WifeððsÐ $X" Ðpetition.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€and€unless€theÐ Ì&"% Ðevidence€preponderates€against€the€award,€it€will€not€be€disturbed€on€appeal.€€ò òòòLyon€v.€Lyon,€óóó ó765Ð ¸'#& ÐS.W.€2d€759,€763€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1988).€€From€a€review€of€the€record,€we€find€that€the€evidenceÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdoes€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€decision€regarding€attorneyððs€fees.€€In€addition,€weÐ )à$( Ðâ âdecline€to€award€attorneyððs€fees€on€appeal.Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àIn€sum,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€order€regarding€Husbandððs€child€support€obligations,Ð ° Ðâ âincluding€his€responsibilities€for€visitation,€medical,€and€dental€expenses,€and€as€to€the€issue€ofÐ œì Ðretroactive€child€support.€€€The€case€is€remanded€for€such€proceedings€necessary€to€determine€theseÐ ˆØ Ðissues€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€In€all€other€respects,€the€trial€courtððs€order€is€affirmed.€€CostsÐ tÄ Ðof€the€appeal€are€assessed€equally€between€the€Appellant,€Dana€Allanmore€Smith,€and€his€surety,€andÐ `° Ðthe€Appellee,€Angela€Childress€Smith.Ð L œ ÐÔ#†XiXXXiŽb#ÔÔ#†¼^í»XXi¶_#ÔÔ€XiX»¼^íÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à__________________________________________Ð $ t Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.