Document: AFFIDAVIT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/476.0 AFFIDAVIT 2023-06-08 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2023-06-08
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document title: AFFIDAVIT
Comprehensive Summary:
Aaron Surina, the respondent, and father of two minor children, David and Andrew, alleges significant misconduct and disregard for the children’s welfare by the petitioner, Sirinya Surina. Aaron highlights Sirinya’s continuous exposure of their children to an inappropriate environment, her workplace, a bar containing inebriated individuals. This action demonstrates a blatant disregard for the children’s emotional and physical well-being.
In addition, Aaron accuses Sirinya of neglecting the children’s education and violating their parenting plan. Notably, Sirinya relocated residences without notifying Aaron or seeking his input, causing educational instability for their children. She also failed to include Aaron in important decisions associated with the children’s Individualized Education Program (IEP), excluding him from contributing to their educational needs.
Aaron further alleges that Sirinya employs restrictive parenting, refusing to allow additional time outside the court-approved plan which obstructs him from spending quality time with their children and meeting their educational needs. He reveals that due to Sirinya’s reluctance to co-parent, their children have expressed a preference to live with him.
Aaron also raises concerns about Sirinya’s potential alcoholism linked to her association with a bar, urging the court to assess her suitability as a parent.
Despite these serious allegations, Aaron maintains he has adhered to all court orders and consistently fulfilled his parental obligations. He argues that the evidence of Sirinya’s misconduct and neglect represents a clear bias in the court’s previous rulings, favoring the mother regardless of her actions. This, according to Aaron, constitutes a grave injustice toward him and his children, necessitating a reconsideration of their custody agreement.
From Aaron’s perspective, the court documents suggest an unfair treatment and possible bias against him, despite his genuine concerns and request for a change of custody to better protect his sons’ well-being. His plea appears to be given little consideration, potentially reflecting an unjust and biased approach by the court. Aaron’s commitment to truthfulness is underscored as he declares under penalty of perjury that his statements are accurate. Nevertheless, the perceived lack of responsiveness from the court could be interpreted as unethical conduct or partiality against him, further exacerbating the injustices he and his children face.
About The Author
