I have heard of cases like this where courts or case managers require a parent to provide direct expenses in addition to child support.  This practice is absolutely incorrect!  The child support tables in the guidelines provide for all direct and indirect expenses, less health care and child care.  Health care and child care are usually included on the worksheet so that parents automatically pay their income proportionate share, but it can be agreed outside of the worksheet.

The situation with direct expenses being included in the tables is documented in the meeting minutes and it is also further supported by case law many years ago.  In this case, yes, Mother should be covering all expenses for the children (including all expenses for sports) and this comes out of child support.

Remember that child support payments were never intended to fund 100% of a child's expenses.  This is only one parents's contribution.  Both parents have a financial obligation - that includes Mom.

I completely agree.  Here's my feedback.

Guidelines - abiding by the guidelines is actually state law.  A judge must make specific findings of fact in order to deviate from the guidelines.  The guidelines are derived from the Consumer Expenditure Survey data conducted by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics.  If things are getting made up, the orders can likely be appealed to the KS Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court.

Troubled opposing parties - firstly, requesting attorney fees is pretty standard practice.  They all request fees just in case.  Actually you should be the one requesting attorney fees if the motion is frivolous and without merit. All of your motions should request attorney fees.  I rarely see attorney fees being awarded.

All parties have a right to due process.  I can only speak from experience, but I have had great luck with returning the favor.  As an example I was faced with a subpoena against my income and all my employment records.  I objected at a hearing stating most of the records had nothing to do with my income.  The judge said that's just "typical language."  So, instead of just dealing with it, I went home and drafted a subpoena with the same language and upped the ante 25%.  I knew that when I filed it, it would fly like a bird because the judge had just ruled on something similar.  The information I gained from those 4 or 5 subpoenas was what changed the trajectory of my case.  ANYTHING that might lead to evidence is discoverable per Kansas law.  So, I guess what I'm saying is that if they want to play hardball, sometimes, you just need to roll up the sleeves.

It all depends on who you're dealing with and your own capability.  I had little to lose and anyone with a conscience should well understand that someone with very little to lose can be very dangerous.  Spend the time reading statutes, case law, court documents from other cases, and even listen to other cases.  You'll start to see some patterns.  I was able to go toe-to-toe with my opposition and in the end I won.  I didn't give an inch without a fight and the tide turned in my favor when I started doing that.  The battle can be won, but first you have to believe in yourself and start putting in the homework.