Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
“P E T I T I O N
1. Petitioner is xxx years old, born on xxx, old and a resident of xxx City.elo
Petitioner is a graduate of Bachelor of Science in xxx from the xxx. He had completed
various relevant training in his field that catapulted him to the coveted position of Chief
Mate at a very young age. Petitioner was the ship captain at the age of xxx years of the
xxx, where he took of his training in his field.
Attached as Annex “A” hereof is a copy of the Bio-Dataof the petitioner for ready
reference.
2. The respondent xxx is xxx years old, born on xxx, and a resident of xxx City, where she
may be served with summons for the instant case.
Respondent finished xxx at a school in xxx. While petitioner knew that respondent was
employed with xxx from xxx to xxx, he has no knowledge of respondent’s present
employment, if any.
3. Petitioner has been employed at the xxx Corporation from xxx until present. He was a
Deck Cadet from xxx to xxx; Third Mate from xxx to xxx; Third/Second Mate from xxx
to xxx; Second Mate / Chief Mate from xxx to xxx; and Chief Mate from xxx to xxx. He
holds the record of being the youngest ship captain at a young age of xxx years old of the
xxx Corporation.
4. Petitioner had a son out of wedlock, during his bachelor years. The son is xxx, xxx years
old, born on xxx, xxx grade pupil. Petitioner has been the one providing financial
support to xxx through remittances deposited in a bank.
6. Since then, petitioner and respondent saw each other once every week. They were
already sweethearts when petitioner boarded a vessel as Desk Cadet in xxx for
hisfirst work contract. Their relationship continued via long distance, with constant
calls and emails. In xxx, petitioner had his vacation in the Philippines. It was then when
he introduced the respondent to his family. The latter warmly accepted the respondent.
7. In xxx, respondent started to stay at the house of the petitioner, with petitioner’s
parents and siblings. Petitioner’s siblings started to notice that petitioner and
respondent often engaged in verbal arguments over petty matters. They would shout at
each other and no one would want to back off. Petitioner expected the respondent to
give in during fights but respondent would even get angrier than him, not wanting to
lower her voice.
8. Moreover, Petitioner discovered that Respondent is the dominant and controlling type.
She wanted things her way and would be very angry when her wants are not granted.
Petitioner realized that he and respondent are incompatible to each other. He already
wanted to separate from her but he could not do so when she broke the news that she
was already pregnant with their child.
9. Petitioner and respondent eventually got marriage to each other on xxx, despite the
uncertainties already entertained in the mind of the petitioner, because petitioner had
asked the permission of the respondent’s mother for the said marriage. After the
nuptial, the couple continued to establish their dwelling place at the house of
Petitioner’s parents.
10. While living together as husband and wife, petitioner found out that respondent was a
very jealous and suspicious woman. Whenever Petitioner arrived home from his
training, Respondent would check his belongings, especially his mobile phone, for any
evidence of a probable infidelity on his part. She suspected him of having an illicit affair
with his former girlfriends, particularly with the one whom he had sired a child out of
wedlock. While petitioner admitted that he had a son prior to meeting the respondent
and he had flings before; he no longer engaged in such flings after his wedding with the
respondent. However, respondent did not believe the petitioner and she grew all the
more suspicious of his actions, accusing him of infidelity even if she has no concrete
basis at all.
11. Despite the fact that their marital relationship was already in shambles as they
continue to engage in heated argumentation and fights, the supposed child of the
parties, xxx was born on xxx.
The differences in the facial features of the petitioner and Xxx Xxx are readily visible in
the attached picture of the petitioner and xxx taken recently in xxx (Annex
“E” hereof).
19. In xxx Petitioner boarded a vessel as Second Mate, promoted to Chief Mate, for
his fourth work contract. He then met another woman, named xxx and engaged in an
illicit affair with her. The following year, xxx, Petitioner and xxx sired a child named xxx,
to whom the petitioner also extends financial support as his child.
22. Petitioner expected respondent to be caring and thoughtful towards him, but she failed
to look after Petitioner’s welfare. She was cold and apathetic towards his
concerns. Respondent could not even prepare merienda for the petitioner and would
require him to prepare his own merienda. Moreover, respondent continued to be
suspicious of him, constantly checking his belongings upon arrival from his review
classes. Respondent was selfish, jealous and indifferent. Respondent never cared for
the petitioner and his needs.
30. The petitioner had engaged the services of Dr. xxx, Clinical Psychologist, for the
determination ofpsychological evaluation of both parties, who will be presented as
an expert witness in support of the instant petition.
Attached is Annex “G” is a copy of the Curriculum Vitae of Dr. xxx, Clinical
Psychologist.
“After a thorough analysis of the data presented, it is revealed that the eventual
shattering of the conjugal partnership between xxx and xxx is brought forth by
the psychological incapacitation of the Petitioner and Respondent. They were
both governed by a debilitating psychological conditions, which made them inept to be
actively part of a relationship where mutuality is founded and required. Their attitude
and behavior are all self-centered in nature that both their strivings are largely focused
to cater their pathological needs and demands”.
Petitioner lacked adequate insight towards his pathological condition. This being
the case, he failed to evaluate the wrongness of his actions and was unable to profit from
experience. He utilized rationalization mechanism and offers alibis to place himself in
the best possible light, despite his evident shortcomings or failures. He would always put
the blame on the Respondent while defending his impulsive and self-centered ways by
making justifications of his decisions and actions. He would even highlight his pathetic
condition, being the one who passively honors his financial obligations, which
apparently places him in a positive spotlight. However, monetary allocations are only
part of his responsibilities as a husband. He may argue that he was making it big and
successful in his career, but he was actually using this as his scapegoat, allowing his
marital relationship to suffer and emotional bond to really flourish. He was blaming the
Respondent, the situation, and other people, but never himself.
She is deceitful woman who is not fettered by any moral obligation to create lies for her
personal gains or profit. Always aiming to alleviate herself, she lied regarding the
identity of her child and passed it on as the son of the Petitioner to trap him into
marrying her. She never cared for the well-being of her son or the Petitioner knowing
that the scores of lies she created will affect both of them. In the past years that they
were together, she kept to herself the knowledge that Petitioner is not the biological
father of her son yet she asserted herself like a fishmonger wife’s who always demanded
for support.
The personality aberration that respondent is suffering from has its initial course during
the crucial developmental phase in her life—childhood and adolescent years—where
negative experiences and child-rearing practices severely affects the personality
development. In the case of the Respondent, she grew up without a father figure since
her parents separated when she was a baby and he never communicated with them
again after he left them. Looking at the picture, the young respondent has developed a
strong sense of insecurity and inadequacy in absence of fatherly affection that she needs.
Hence, she grew up compensating for this insecurity by engaging in relationship with
men by being seductive and provocative in the hopes that they could fill the void that
she has inside only to be always disappointed since they always falls short to her high
expectation. She never realized that they would never fulfill or quench the emotional
insecurity that she has.
Along with this is the lack of fatherly affection comes the lack of adequate discipline and
guidance from her mother who was lenient in her ways with them especially the
respondent. Albeit that they were not financially well off, her mother indulges her whim
and allows her so much freedom to do what she wants. Punishment and sufficient
disciplinary measures were not provided to her leaving the young respondent with the
defective notion that she has the liberty to do what she wants. Later on, with the excess
freedom given to her, she has come to believed that she could use anyone at her own
disposal, without care for his or her feelings and emotions. Since she grew up perceiving
herself so deprived of love, she compensates later on by asserting her bloated self-
esteem to people. She became vain, materialistic and demanding as her way to appease
whatever ineptitude she has. Enjoying a rather unfettered life due to the absence of
effective caretakers, she became dominant and demanding, as well as stubborn in
insisting for what she wants no matter how impractical it could be. Respondent did not
learn to be submissive, that she would do things without giving consideration on how it
might affect others or her relationships.
With this, due to the absence of proper guidance, and effective disciplinary
means, respondent grew up embracing these maladaptive responses and turning them
as the pillars of her personality”.
Since the psychological aberration of the Petitioner and Respondent stemmed early in
their lives, these have been engraved into their system making their functioning and
adjustments highly defective. Being an integral part of their wellbeing, such disorders
are considered to be grave, pervasive, serious, severe and permanent rendering it totally
beyond repair despite available treatments and intervention. Likewise, their
psychological incapacitations are noted to be of juridical antecedence – meaning - such
flawed personality pattern began before they entered marriage and manifested only
thereon. Considering the severity of Petitioner and Respondent’s aberrant psychological
conditions, reconciliation is found to be very difficult and impossible”.
“Erstwhile couple, xxx and xxx, could never live together harmoniously as authentic
husband and wife with the psychological incapacitation of both of them. The hope of
reconciliation with the hope of a functional or normal marital union founded on love,
respect, trust, support and commitment is viewed to be uncertain and impossible as
these essential attributes of marriage never existed from the start of the relationship”.
“Hence, with much consideration to the findings and discussions made, the undersigned
psychologist humbly requests to this Honorable Court that their marriage be declared
null and void, on the account of Petitioner’s psychological incapacitation”.
PRAYER
Petitioner also prays for other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable in the
premises.
Las Pinas City, xxx.
LASERNA CUEVA-MERCADER
& ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES
Counsel for the Petitioner
Unit 15, Star Arcade, C. V. Starr Avenue
Philamlife Village, Las Pinas City
Tel. Nos. 872-5443; 846-2539
Fax No. 846-2539