Document: TEMP ORDER OF CHILD SUPPORT
Link: [Open PDF](https://familylaw.strangled.net/17-3-01817-32-PDF//55.0 TEMP ORDER OF CHILD SUPPORT 2017-09-28 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2017-09-28
Summary (Justice Demanded)
The TEMP ORDER OF CHILD SUPPORT document displays multiple instances of bias and unfair treatment towards Aaron Surina, the father involved in the case. It imputes income to Aaron without considering his individual circumstances or employment opportunities, based on discriminatory factors such as English being his second language and his role as a stay-at-home parent since arriving from Thailand. In contrast, the document fails to adequately consider the mother’s financial situation, despite acknowledging her suspended second job involving online marketing. This inconsistency in evaluating both parents’ circumstances showcases a clear bias in favor of the mother, Sirinya Surina.
The child support amount imposed on Aaron for his two sons, David and Andrew, is deemed excessive and potentially burdensome, especially if he is facing financial struggles. The lack of clear guidelines for adjusting the child support amount raises concerns about arbitrary changes that could further disadvantage Aaron. Moreover, the enforcement mechanisms outlined in the document, such as income withholding and property liens, appear punitive and one-sided, potentially jeopardizing Aaron’s financial stability and ability to provide for his children.
The document also places stringent requirements on Aaron regarding health insurance for his children without considering any potential challenges he may encounter in meeting these obligations. The language used in the document seems one-sided and fails to address Aaron’s circumstances adequately, potentially favoring Sirinya Surina and imposing a significant financial burden on Aaron without assessing his ability to comply. The involvement of non-parent custodians and DCS in enforcing medical support raises questions about transparency and fairness in the process, emphasizing the need to protect Aaron’s rights as a parent.
Overall, the document reflects a lack of empathy towards Aaron’s situation, potentially intimidating and coercive language, and a focus on strict enforcement measures without considering the individual challenges he may be facing. As Aaron’s attorney, it is crucial to challenge these injustices, advocate for a more equitable resolution, and ensure that his rights and responsibilities as a father are protected in the legal proceedings.
About The Author
