Ordered that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The Family Court properly rejected the fathers claims that his financial situation, prolonged unemployment, and illnesses warranted a drastic reduction of his maintenance and child support obligations. The father has failed to produce any competent evidence to support his claim that he used his best efforts to obtain employment commensurate with his qualifications and experience ( see, Matter of Heverin v. Sackel, 239 A.D.2d 418; Matter of Yepes v. Fichera, 230 A.D.2d 803) or that his medical conditions rendered him unemployable ( see, Matter of Reed v. Reed, 240 A.D.2d 951).
Further, under the circumstances of this case, the father is not entitled to child support from the mother on the ground that one of the parties children has relocated to his residence ( see, Tuchrello v. Tuchrello, 204 A.D.2d 1020).
O'Brien, J.P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.