A DOCTOR who quit his high-paying job for a quieter life after his marriage ended has been ordered to continue paying a high level of child support because he has the "potential" to earn more money.

The divorced 48-year-old GP, who cannot be identified, was earning around $320,000 a year at his 24-hour surgery before he and his wife split.

The stress of the relationship ending caused him to seek a sea change, quitting his role at the surgery and taking up a part-time position at a family medical centre, being paid around $40,000 a year.

But a Child Support Agency case officer ruled the doctor's drop in income was due to a "lifestyle choice" and ordered him to maintain yearly payments of $18,700, including the bulk of a $4000 sum for private school tuition.

After a Family Court judge agreed with the assessment, the doctor appealed to the court's full bench.

However, in a written judgment, the court has found the GP should pay child support based on an average earning capacity of around $80,000 --twice the amount he now earns at his smaller surgery.


The doctor and his therapist wife separated in 2000 and have two children aged 12 and nine.
Two months after the couple's separation, the doctor quit his job, citing stress from the break-up.

He later joined a small, family medical centre that bulk-billed patients.

"The father asserted that he was earning about $40,000 per annum whilst the mother contended that he had a capacity to earn about $300,000 per annum," the judgment said.

"The father acknowledged that he had earned a very significant sum as a general practitioner but ... had joined a family medical centre and did not wish to return to the busier practice at the 24-hour medical centre."

Judge James Barry found the doctor had adopted a different lifestyle by choice and could be earning double the amount he was currently paid.

"No one is expecting [him] to earn a taxable income of $250,000 to $300,000 a year as he did at the time prior to the separation," Judge Barry said.

"However, it is not unrealistic to expect a general practitioner with 20 years' experience ... to earn an income of $80,000 a year."

In evidence to the court, the doctor conceded he could earn more than $42,000 a year if he worked full time.

The full bench agreed there was no error in the judge's ruling and dismissed the appeal.

Yesterday, the director of father's help group Dads In Distress Tony Miller said it was not uncommon for child support payments to be based on the potential earnings of fathers after they had left a previously high-paying job.

"It happens every day of the week," Mr Miller said.

"They may have high-pressure jobs and their marriages break up and they can't take it any more and are forced to take a lesser position. But they still get slugged for their potential to earn."