We will consider the merits of the case. SRS argues the trial court exceeded its statutory authority in ordering SRS to pay for T.D.'s counseling with Moore. SRS does not contend the trial court abused its discretion. The guardian ad litem argues the order of the trial court was proper. The issue raised requires the interpretation of statutes.
Statutory interpretation is a question of law and appellate review is unlimited.
For the purpose of this section, a child who is a nonresident of the state of Kansas or whose residence is unknown shall have residence in the county where the proceedings are instituted. In In re D.J.K , the trial court required D.J.K. to attend a day-reporting program for juvenile offenders for violating his probation. Since D.J.K.'s parents could not afford the program, the trial court ordered D.J.K. into SRS custody, placed him with his father, and ordered him to begin the program. On appeal, SRS challenged the trial court's decision to place the child with his father and to require SRS to pay for the program. This court noted that under K.S.A. 1999 Supp.