Document: AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENDANT RESPONDENT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/504.0 AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENDANT RESPONDENT 2023-07-12 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2023-07-12
Summary (Justice Demanded)
In the court documents, Aaron Surina, the father, contends there is significant unfairness and potential bias against him, with unethical conduct exhibited by his ex-partner, Sirinya Surina, and her legal representation. Sirinya’s claims of financial difficulties contradicted by her purchase of a more expensive house raise questions about her decision-making and true motives behind the proposed relocation. Despite her assertion of sole decision-making authority, Aaron has been the primary decision-maker for the children’s healthcare and education.
Aaron expresses concerns about his children’s unsupervised time in a bar due to Sirinya’s work commitments and her lack of cooperation in resolving disputes outside of court. He also points out her false and misleading claims in court, which paint him in a negative light, and her refusal to consider his reasonable requests and adjust the parenting plan.
Aaron alleges that Sirinya’s motives are primarily monetary, as she has consistently withheld updated financial information. He also highlights her discriminatory argument that he cannot be entrusted with the children’s care because he is not their mother. He raises concerns about the proposed school change for their eldest son, which he believes is disruptive and potentially harmful, given its lower rating. He criticizes Sirinya’s focus on financial considerations over the children’s well-being and her failure to acknowledge his essential role in their lives.
He reveals that Sirinya’s statements about affordability are misleading and that her dishonesty in court raises serious questions about her credibility. He objects to her decision to relocate without proper notice or court approval and requests a hearing to address these concerns.
Aaron has consistently shown his dedication to his children’s well-being, education, and stability. He moved closer to facilitate their schooling and protect them from inappropriate environments. However, his attempts to promote their welfare are often dismissed or disregarded, suggesting a bias against him. He has suffered significant financial losses due to Sirinya’s actions, including the loss of a thousand dollars in forfeited rentals and hotel reservations when she withheld the children during his court-ordered time.
Aaron’s parental rights and concerns seem to be unfairly restricted and disregarded. He has been accused of contempt for moving without court permission, despite his evident dedication to his children’s well-being. His time with his children appears to be unfairly limited by Sirinya, who imposes her personal judgments on his parenting methods.
Aaron also expresses concerns about his son David’s special education assessment, where he feels his opinions were disregarded. He believes that the school’s decision against a formal evaluation might be unjust and not in David’s best interest.
Finally, Aaron criticizes the court’s unclear communication regarding an action involving his child. He believes this could be viewed as unfair and unethical, as it hinders his ability to fully understand his child’s rights. This lack of clarity potentially undermines his ability to advocate effectively for his child’s rights.
In conclusion, Aaron Surina perceives significant bias and unfairness in the court’s handling of his case, with potential unethical conduct by his ex-partner and her legal representation. Despite his repeated attempts to act in his children’s best interests, he feels his efforts are often ignored, suggesting a possible bias against him. He calls for a more balanced and fair consideration of all factors in the proceedings, with an emphasis on prioritizing the children’s welfare, education, and stability.
About The Author
