Document: AFFIDAVIT OF PLAINTIFF PETITIONER
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/501.0 AFFIDAVIT OF PLAINTIFF PETITIONER 2023-07-10 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2023-07-10
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document Title: AFFIDAVIT OF PLAINTIFF PETITIONER
The detailed analysis of the court document reveals several instances of potential bias and perceived unfairness against Aaron Surina. Sirinya Surina, Aaron’s ex-spouse, moved prior to Aaron filing a motion to restrain relocation, undermining Aaron’s rights as a father. Her contradictory claims about her working hours and compliance with court orders cast doubt on her credibility and the transparency of the court process.
Aaron contends that Sirinya avoids contributing to child-raising costs, a claim she counters with Aaron’s delay in child support payments. However, this argument disregards the fact that child support isn’t meant to cover all child-rearing costs, imposing an unfair financial burden on Aaron. Sirinya’s request for the court to deny Aaron’s proposed parenting plan without being served a copy violates Aaron’s right to due process.
Sirinya also communicates about purchasing a house before securing her attorney, indicating a predetermined intention to relocate without Aaron’s agreement. She mentions a denied protection order she sought against Aaron, raising questions about her credibility and intentions. Sirinya’s request for the court to deny Aaron’s motion to restrain her temporary relocation could disrupt Aaron’s accessibility and relationship with his children.
The court documents also contain allegations against Aaron, such as “abusive use of conflict,” without providing concrete evidence. The decision-making rights for major aspects of the children’s lives have been entirely awarded to Sirinya, suggesting Aaron is unfit without clear evidence or justification.
The holiday schedule and arrangements for the exchange of the children could be considered inconvenient or biased, imposing a significant burden on Aaron. The vague stipulation regarding relocation could allow for sudden changes in the children’s lives without considering Aaron’s rights as a parent.
From Aaron’s perspective, the court documents could potentially deprive him of his court-ordered time with his children and infringe upon his rights as a father due to the custodian having the right to withhold information or move without notice. The documents may also allow for a potentially disruptive move to take place before Aaron’s objections are fully heard.
The court documents impose restrictions on Aaron, limiting his communication with his children and infringing upon his freedom of speech. The requirement for neither parent to travel outside of Washington with the children without informing the other could be seen as an unnecessary constraint on Aaron’s freedom of movement. These rules may appear to be heavily restrictive and potentially biased towards the other party, causing Aaron to feel unfairly treated.
About The Author
