Forced to Double Cover for Med. Ins?

[surfer]

What is the name of your state? Oregon
My old divorce decree states: "both parents must maintain health insurance for the child"
I am a teacher and have my child medically covered (paid by the district).
My ex-wife, who has sole-custody, pays $226/mo for the child's coverage.
In a recent support review, I have been ordered to pay a major portion of ex-wife's coverage. (44%) Therefore I have to give my ex. almost $100/month, even though I am providing insurance myself, and my coverage is better than the ex's in many areas.
So, I am protesting this, and looking for legal reasons to back up my case.
Am I going to have to pay for part of the Ex's policy too? Is there anything I can do, or am I at the whim of my ex-wife's decision to double-cover our child?

Thanks.What is the name of your state?

 

[Claire's mom]

What year was that order made? Just curious b/c we were told that double-coverage wasn't really any help like it did in the past. I was told by our insurance lady at work to save our money b/c it wasn't worth it. But, in our case, it didn't cost me anything to add my daughter & so it also wouldn't cost him anything to add her on his policy as well. Are there any benefits to having the double-coverage? If not, would mom fight you on it? (I hope not).

 

[SingleMom67]

Also, in adding to Claire's post, often times a judge will look at which policy is the better of the two. And if that just so happens to be mom's, then you're on the hook to pay a portion of the premium.

 

[surfer]

My insurance is definitly better. The original court order (5 years ago) states that each of us have to maintain ins, and that no child support is to be awarded. As of now though I have to pay a portion of hers regardless that I have the kid covered.