Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3119
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30 (2026)

Determining person responsible for health care of children

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 17, 2019
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 166 - 133rd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court, with respect to court child support orders, and the child support enforcement agency, with respect to administrative child support orders, shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care coverage of the children subject to the child support order and shall include provisions for the health care coverage of the children in the child support order. The order shall specify that the obligor and obligee are both liable for the health care expenses for the children who are not covered by private health insurance according to a formula established by each court, with respect to a court child support order, or each child support enforcement agency, with respect to an administrative child support order.

(B) The child support obligee is rebuttably presumed to be the appropriate parent to provide health insurance coverage for the children subject to the child support order. The order shall specify that the obligee must provide the health insurance coverage unless rebutted pursuant to division (B)(1) of this section.

(1) The court or child support enforcement agency may consider the following factors to rebut the presumption when determining if the child support obligor is the appropriate parent to provide health insurance coverage:

(a) The obligor already has health insurance coverage for the child that is reasonable in cost;

(b) The obligor already has health insurance coverage in place for the child that is not reasonable in cost, but the obligor wishes to be named the health insurance obligor and provide coverage under division (A)(2)(a) of section 3119.302 of the Revised Code;

(c) The obligor can obtain health insurance coverage for the child that is reasonable in cost through an employer or other source. For employer-based coverage, the court or child support enforcement agency shall consider the length of time the obligor has worked with the employer and the stability of the insurance.

(d) The obligee is a non-parent individual or agency that has no duty to provide medical support.

(2) If health insurance coverage for the children is not available at a reasonable cost to the obligor or the obligee at the time the court or agency issues the order, the order shall include a requirement that the obligee obtain health care coverage for the children not later than thirty days after it becomes available to the obligee at a reasonable cost, and to inform the child support enforcement agency when health care coverage for the children has been obtained.

(3) If health insurance coverage becomes available to the obligor at a reasonable cost, the obligor shall inform the child support enforcement agency and may seek a modification of health care coverage from the court with respect to a court child support order, or from the agency with respect to an administrative support order.

(C) When a child support order is issued or modified, the order shall include a cash medical support amount consistent with division (B) of section 3119.302 of the Revised Code for each child subject to the order. The cash medical support amount shall be ordered based on the number of children subject to the order and split between the parties using the parents' income share.

(D) Any cash medical support paid pursuant to division (C) of this section shall be paid through the department of job and family services by the obligor to either the obligee if the children are not medicaid recipients, or to the department of medicaid when a medicaid assignment is in effect for any child under the support order.

(E) The cost of providing health insurance coverage for a child subject to an order shall be defrayed by a credit against that parent's annual income when calculating support as required under section 3119.02 of the Revised Code using the basic child support schedule and applicable worksheet. The credit shall be equal to the total actual out-of-pocket cost for health insurance premiums for the coverage. Any credit given will be less any subsidy, including a premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction received by the parent providing coverage.

(F) Both parents may be ordered to provide health care coverage and pay cash medical support if the obligee is a nonparent individual or agency that has no duty to provide medical support.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2013–2026 · leading case: Herron v. Herron, 2021 Ohio 2223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Herron v. Herron, 2021 Ohio 2223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “Primary selector of medical providers {¶60} To the extent Father argues that the trial court abused its discretion by designating Mother as the parent to select the medical providers for E.”
V.C. v. O.C., 2021 Ohio 1491 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “R.C. 3119.30 states in relevant part: (A) In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court, with respect to court child support orders, * * * shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care coverage of the children…”
Doubler v. Doubler, 2023 Ohio 393 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “12 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR XIII THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY NOT PROPERLY RECOGNIZING THE PARENT PROVIDING HEALTH INSURANCE IN CONTRAST TO THE MANDATES SET FORTH WITHIN R.C. 3119.30. {¶38} In his thirteenth assignment of error, Mr.”
Smith v. Smith, 2019 Ohio 129 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See R.C. 3119.30(C), (D). Husband submitted an affidavit in support of his motion.”
Shendel v. Graham, 2017 Ohio 4236 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “{¶ 90} R.C. 3119.30(A) states in part, {¶ 91} "In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court * * * shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care of the children subject to the child support order and shall…”
In re J.C., 2022 Ohio 3326 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “The court also ordered that pursuant to R.C. 3119.30(B)(1), Mother and Father were to each carry private health insurance for the children to meet the medical needs of the children while in their custody.”
King v. King, 2021 Ohio 2970 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “But the magistrate’s decision concludes that “[a]ccording to R.C. 3119.30(B), Defendant, as the Obligee, is the appropriate parent to provide health insurance for the children.”
Dyer v. Gomez, 2022 Ohio 1127 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “, R.C. 3119.30 (health care); R.C. 3119.82 (tax dependent).”
In re S.C., 2020 Ohio 233 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “" R.C. 3119.30(C). Those expenses not covered by the cash medical support are to be determined by a "formula established by the court.”
Bandza v. Bandza, 2021 Ohio 4011 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Pursuant to R.C. 3119.30, a trial court must determine whether there is health insurance coverage available to either parent.”
Bissell v. Bissell, 2016 Ohio 3086 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “However, the attached and incorporated “Standard Order of Health Care Needs for Dependent Children” lists the priorities of who shall provide for health coverage as required by R.C. 3119.30. That document requires that the parents “shall designate the children as covered…”
Gould v. Gould, 2021 Ohio 3493 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Fourth Assignment of Error: The trial court erred and abused its discretion by naming Appellant Child Support Obligor and Health Insurance Obligor without addressing the presumption of R.C. 3119.30(B) 5. Fifth Assignment of Error: The trial court erred and abused its discretion…”
Show all 27 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(A) — 6 cases
V.C. v. O.C., 2021 Ohio 1491 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “R.C. 3119.30 states in relevant part: (A) In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court, with respect to court child support orders, * * * shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care coverage of the children…”
Herron v. Herron, 2021 Ohio 2223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Primary selector of medical providers {¶60} To the extent Father argues that the trial court abused its discretion by designating Mother as the parent to select the medical providers for E.”
Shendel v. Graham, 2017 Ohio 4236 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “{¶ 90} R.C. 3119.30(A) states in part, {¶ 91} "In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court * * * shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care of the children subject to the child support order and shall…”
McNabb v. McNabb, 2013 Ohio 2158 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013).
Batcher v. Pierce, 2018 Ohio 3766 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(B) — 5 cases
Herron v. Herron, 2021 Ohio 2223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Primary selector of medical providers {¶60} To the extent Father argues that the trial court abused its discretion by designating Mother as the parent to select the medical providers for E.”
Doubler v. Doubler, 2023 Ohio 393 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). “12 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR XIII THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY NOT PROPERLY RECOGNIZING THE PARENT PROVIDING HEALTH INSURANCE IN CONTRAST TO THE MANDATES SET FORTH WITHIN R.C. 3119.30. {¶38} In his thirteenth assignment of error, Mr.”
King v. King, 2021 Ohio 2970 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “But the magistrate’s decision concludes that “[a]ccording to R.C. 3119.30(B), Defendant, as the Obligee, is the appropriate parent to provide health insurance for the children.”
Gould v. Gould, 2021 Ohio 3493 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Fourth Assignment of Error: The trial court erred and abused its discretion by naming Appellant Child Support Obligor and Health Insurance Obligor without addressing the presumption of R.C. 3119.30(B) 5. Fifth Assignment of Error: The trial court erred and abused its discretion…”
Rowe v. Rowe, 2018 Ohio 1103 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(B)(1) — 4 cases
Herron v. Herron, 2021 Ohio 2223 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “Primary selector of medical providers {¶60} To the extent Father argues that the trial court abused its discretion by designating Mother as the parent to select the medical providers for E.”
In re J.C., 2022 Ohio 3326 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “The court also ordered that pursuant to R.C. 3119.30(B)(1), Mother and Father were to each carry private health insurance for the children to meet the medical needs of the children while in their custody.”
Shendel v. Graham, 2017 Ohio 4236 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “{¶ 90} R.C. 3119.30(A) states in part, {¶ 91} "In any action or proceeding in which a child support order is issued or modified, the court * * * shall determine the person or persons responsible for the health care of the children subject to the child support order and shall…”
Rowe v. Rowe, 2018 Ohio 1103 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(B)(1)(c) — 1 case
In re M.C., 2021 Ohio 3703 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(B)(4) — 1 case
Rowe v. Rowe, 2018 Ohio 1103 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(C) — 6 cases
Smith v. Smith, 2019 Ohio 129 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “See R.C. 3119.30(C), (D). Husband submitted an affidavit in support of his motion.”
In re S.C., 2020 Ohio 233 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “" R.C. 3119.30(C). Those expenses not covered by the cash medical support are to be determined by a "formula established by the court.”
Beyer v. Beyer, 2024 Ohio 1278 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
Rowe v. Rowe, 2018 Ohio 1103 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
Rann v. Maish, 2025 Ohio 1744 (Ohio Ct. App. 2025).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(C)(1) — 1 case
Beyer v. Beyer, 2024 Ohio 1278 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.30(E) — 2 cases
Castello v. Castello, 2023 Ohio 4586 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023).
Louden v. Louden, 2026 Ohio 2015 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.