## Facts

- Edward Harmon married Darlene Dooley in 1985, becoming stepfather to her two minor daughters from a prior marriage.
- The children lived with their mother and Harmon for several years.
- In February 1992, the children left that home and began residing with their biological father and his new wife.
- A custody modification placed the children’s primary residential placement with the father effective March 31, 1992.
- DSHS initiated administrative proceedings to impose and collect child support from Harmon.
- An administrative law judge concluded Harmon had an ongoing support obligation, relying in part on Washington’s family expense statute, RCW 26.16.205, and treating Harmon as jointly responsible for support despite the children no longer residing with him.
- Agency review, the superior court, and the Court of Appeals upheld the support obligation imposed on Harmon.

## Issues

1. Whether RCW 26.16.205 may be used as an independent basis to impose a primary child-support obligation on a stepparent equal to that of the child’s parents, including after the child leaves the stepparent’s household.
2. Whether, under RCW 26.19, DSHS may compute the basic child support obligation by including a stepparent’s income.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court reversed.
- RCW 26.16.205 is not a self-contained child-support statute and cannot be used independent of RCW 26.19’s standards and schedule for child support.
- Under RCW 26.19, the basic child support obligation is calculated based on the natural parents’ incomes, without including stepparent income.
- The statutory scheme does not permit substituting a stepparent for a parent in determining the basic child support obligation.
- DSHS could not impose primary, ongoing child-support liability on Harmon for children residing with their father and stepmother.

## Legal Principles

- General family-expense liability under RCW 26.16.205 cannot be applied to create or extend primary child-support obligations inconsistent with the later-enacted and specific child-support framework in RCW 26.19.
- Washington’s child support schedule reflects legislative policy placing primary child-support responsibility on the child’s natural parents.
- The “basic child support obligation” under RCW 26.19 is computed without reference to a stepparent’s income.
- Agencies and courts may not treat a stepparent as a co-equal primary obligor with the child’s parents for purposes of determining basic child support.

## Conclusion

The court held that Washington’s child-support statutes assign primary support responsibility to natural parents under RCW 26.19 and do not allow DSHS to use the family expense statute to impose continuing primary child-support liability on a stepparent after the stepchildren no longer live in the stepparent’s household.


Harmon v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 134 Wn.2d 523, 951 P.2d 770 (Wash. 1998)