In attempting to translate, to the extent possible under the evidence, a higher standard of living and additional needs of a child into specific monetary requirements, a court should look at, among other items, the costs of food, shelter, education, and recreational costs at the level enjoyed before the dissolution or as near to that level as possible. Yet, without making any further specific findings, it mechanically apportioned the minimum presumptive amount of support for three children pro rata between the parties. Finally, we reject husband's contention that he was denied due process because the court directed counsel to prepare the written orders. The rules of civil procedure should be construed in harmony whenever possible. Recognizing the problem of post-trial delay at the trial level, it allows the court to direct counsel to prepare the written form of an order.
Due process requires notice and the opportunity to be heard.
We have reviewed the other contentions of error and determine that they are without merit. The portions of the 1989 order decreasing maintenance and establishing child support according to the guidelines are reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings and a new order in accordance with the views expressed in this opinion. Nevertheless, the trial court's 1989 order for child support and maintenance shall remain in effect, with adjustments to be made, if appropriate, effective February 1, 1989. In all other respects, the orders are affirmed.