Republic of the
Republic of the PhilippinesPhilippines National Capit
National Capital Judicial Regal Judicial Regionion REGIONAL TRIAL COURT REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 1, Manila Branch 1, Manila
FORRAH
FORRAH RAMOS-NATIVIDAD,RAMOS-NATIVIDAD,
Petitioner
Petitioner
,,--VERSUSVERSUS- - CCIVILIVILCCASEASENNOO.. 0012344500123445
F
FOR OR : DECLARATION: DECLARATION OFOF
NULLITY
NULLITY OFOF MARRIAGEMARRIAGE JAMES NATIVIDAD,
JAMES NATIVIDAD,
R
Resp
esponde
ondent
nt
..x---x x---x
OFFER of TESTIMONY
OFFER of TESTIMONY
The testimony of the witness is offered for the
The testimony of the witness is offered for the following purposfollowing purposes:es: 1. To testify as the
1. To testify as the Expert Witness in this case;Expert Witness in this case; 2. To prove the
2. To prove the material allegations in thematerial allegations in the
Petition
Petition
;; andand 3. To testify on other matters relevant and3. To testify on other matters relevant and incidental in this case.incidental in this case.
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF GIL CAMAYMAYAN
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF GIL CAMAYMAYAN
I, Gil Camaymayan, of legal age, single, with
I, Gil Camaymayan, of legal age, single, with an office address at 1614-an office address at 1614-B Neptuno Street, Fabie Estate, Paco, Manila, as
B Neptuno Street, Fabie Estate, Paco, Manila, as part of my testimony in thepart of my testimony in the above-captioned case, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, above-captioned case, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and state that:
hereby depose and state that:
I am the psychiatrist engaged by the Petitioner, Forrah I am the psychiatrist engaged by the Petitioner, Forrah Ramos- Natividad, in thi
Natividad, in this case to conds case to conduct the Psychiatruct the Psychiatric Evaluation of ic Evaluation of the Parties;the Parties; In relation to the
In relation to the above-entitled case, the counsel, Atty. Ivy Edodollon,above-entitled case, the counsel, Atty. Ivy Edodollon, at her office located at 2D
at her office located at 2D Wheels Bldg., E. Rodriguez Sr. Ave., Quezon City,Wheels Bldg., E. Rodriguez Sr. Ave., Quezon City, asked me questions which I answered
asked me questions which I answered to the best of to the best of my ability, fully consciousmy ability, fully conscious that I did so under
that I did so under oath and that I oath and that I may face perjury and/or any criminal liabilitymay face perjury and/or any criminal liability for false
for false testimonytestimony;;
The questions asked by Atty. Edodollon and the answers I gave are as The questions asked by Atty. Edodollon and the answers I gave are as follows:
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS:
DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS:
Question (Q): Please state your personal circumstances.
Answer (A): I am Dr. Gil Camaymayan, of legal age, Filipino, single and practicing psychiatric counselling at 1614-B Neptuno Street, Fabie Estate,
Paco, Manila.
Q: Why are you here in the Public Attorney’s Office in Manila?
A: To give a sworn statement by way of a judicial affidavit, the same to constitute as my direct testimony, in the above-captioned case.
Q1: What qualifies you to perform the psychiatric evaluation of the parties? A1: I am a psychiatrist and marriage counsellor by profession. I earned my bachelor’s degree in Psychology in the University of the Philippines, Manila
in the year 2003. (Witness presented a copy of his college diploma, a copy of which is hereto attached and marked as Appendix “A”.) I earned my master ’s degree in the year 2005 and my doctoral degree in the year 2009, both in the field of Psychology in the University of the Philippines. (Witness presented a copy of his diplomas which are hereto attached and marked as Appendices “B” and “C”, respectively.)
Q2: Do you know the Petitioner in this case, Ms. Forrah Ramos-Natividad? A2: Yes, ma’am.
Q3: How do you know her?
A3: She came to my office sometime in 24 April 2017 to request a psychological evaluation be conducted on her and her husband, James Natividad, in relation to the case she filed against her husband for the
nullification of their marriage.
Q4: Did you conduct a psychiatric study of the parties in this case? A4: Yes, ma’am.
Q5: Could you please tell us the manner by which you conducted your evaluation?
A5: Yes, ma’am. I did the standard procedure in conducting a psychological evaluation. In the first session, on April 25, 2017 at two o’clock in the afternoon, I asked them to fill out a form which contains questions regarding their psychological, mental and medical history and genealogy. I collected the forms on the next day. On the second session, April 27, 2017, at two o’clock in the afternoon, I met with them separately and asked them a battery of psychological questions. On the third session, On April 29, 2017, I met with them at my office and asked them a series of questions regarding their married life. I also met with their child, Frederick, on the same date, and asked him a series of questions regarding his parents’ treatment of each other around him.
Q6: After your study of the parties, what have you found?
A6: I have found that they have a really estranged marital relationship which makes their marriage dysfunctional.
Q7: Can you elaborate that, please?
A7: What I mean is that their relationship is dysfunctional because one of the partners, in this case Forrah, often feels a little conflict about entering the other’s private world without permission. In their case, Forrah often feels conflicted to get involved with James’ business because she fears that he may react negatively.
Q8: Why do you think that Forrah fears a negative reaction from James? A8: As I have observed in my sessions with them, the dominant person in their relationship is James. It was almost like whatever James says, goes. I have observed from Forrah that she hesitates in answering my questions in front of James. It was almost, as if, she feared punishment if she did something wrong.
Q9: In evaluation of the Respondent, James, what have you found?
A9: I have found James to be chronically irresponsible, psychologically abusive and a pathological liar.
Q10: Can you explain, in layman’s term, what you mean by chronically irresponsible.
A10: Chronical irresponsibility, or Responsibility Deficit Disorder (RDD) in psychological terminology, is a type of antisocial personality disorder which make people careless, capricious or outright reckless. They forget their appointments; they are always late; they neglect to plan ahead; they are financially irresponsible; they don’t care about their belongings or relationships; they ignore deadlines; and they act as though others should bail them out of whatever trouble they get in to. These behavior is normal in adolescents or teenagers, but it is abnormal for adults.
Q11: Why do you say that James suffers from RDD?
A11: One of the symptoms that James shows, that I base my findings on is his inability to stay in one job. He either quits or is fired. I asked his former employers for the reasons why he was fired, and they had almost identical evaluation on him – that he was irresponsible at his job. They said that he was often late or absent. Another symptom is his financial irresponsibility. As discussed by Forrah during one of our sessions, James often squanders his salary on beer houses or drinks with his buddies, neglecting the fact that he has responsibilities of providing for his family. Forrah said that she had to ask her parents for money to buy milk and diapers for their child because James wasted his salary on alcohol.
Q12: Can you say that James’ RDD was present even before his marriage with Forrah?
A12: Yes, Ma’am. Such a disorder is common in adolescents or teenagers. All a person has to do to get rid of it is outgrow it or become responsible when he reaches adulthood. In most cases, a person outgrows it and becomes responsible during adulthood, especially when they get married. However, in the case of James, he was never able to outgrow it as is shown by his current attitude towards his responsibilities.
Q13: Can you explain, in layman’s terms, what is psychologically abusive? A13: Yes, ma’am. Psychological abuse (also referred to as psychological violence, emotional abuse, or mental abuse) is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another person to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Such abuse is often associated with situations of power imbalance, such as abusive relationships, bullying, gaslighting and
Disorder (BPD) which is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by unstable relationships with other people, unstable sense of self, and unstable emotions.
Q14: Why do you say that James is psychologically abusive?
A14: It was apparent to me during our sessions that he was dominant when it comes to his relationship with Forrah. He was often mean to Forrah, and orders her to shut up whenever Forrah says something negative about him. I was also able to infer from Forrah’s reaction to James’ scolding that she was fearful of him. It was as if Forrah suffers from anxiety and psychological stress because of James’ treatment of her.
Q15: Can you say that this behavior or James is present even before his marriage with Forrah?
A15: Yes, Ma’am. The usual onset of this type of behavior is early adulthood which is between the ages of 18 and 25 years. And the duration of which is long-term and indeterminate unless treated.
Q16: Can you describe, in layman’s term, the term pathological liar?
A16: Yes, Ma’am. Pathological lying, also called pseudologia fantastica and mythomania, is a behavior of habitual or compulsive lying. This type of behavior is characterized by chronic fabricative tendency. Which means that
the lying is not provoked by the immediate situation or social pressure so much as it is an innate trait of the personality. Normal lies are usually defensive, and are told to avoid the consequences of telling the truth. They are often white lies that spare another’s feelings, reflect a pro-social attitude, and make civilized human contact possible. Pathological lying, on the other hand, is considered a mental illness because it takes over rational judgment and progresses into the fantasy world and back. It is when an individual
consistently lies for no personal gain.
Q17: How can you say that James is a pathological liar?
A17: There are many instances on which I can base my finding tha t James is a pathological liar. First, he wrote in his patient’s form in my office that he is an advertising manager in a small company while in truth and in fact he was a salesman. He also told me in our one-on-one session that he constantly takes
his family to vacation destinations like Baguio or Boracay during summer breaks, but in truth and in fact, according to Forrah’s statements, they have
never gone beyond the Manila region. One of his co-workers said, during my investigation, that James said that he belongs to a wealthy family and that he is just working as a salesman to experience the life of normal worker. He also told me that he was an undercover agent of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of America, and that his life here in the Philippines is just a cover that’s why he can’t really be held liable for not caring for his family so much.
Q18: Can you prove these accusations?
A18: Yes, ma’am. I have in my possession a video recording of my sessions with James and Forrah, as well as an audio recording of the interview I conducted with his co-worker.
Q19: Can you say that this behavior was present even before James’ marriage with Forrah?
A19: Yes, ma’am. The average onset age of this type of behavior is 16 years old. It was also stated by Forrah that when James was still courting her, he would often make up stories about his life and his achievements, which, as a matter of fact, was the reason she fell in love with him in the first place.
Q20: According to your educated judgment, can you say that the disorders that you described earlier incapacitate James to perform essential marital obligations?
A20: Yes, Ma’am. These disorders incapacitate, or have a strong tendency to incapacitate, James to perform essential marital obligations.
Q21: How?
A21: Chronic irresponsibility hinders the husband from providing his family a decent life. In most cases, the husband neglects the welfare of the family as long as he satisfies his own desires. Psychological abuse is more often the cause of broken families. It will also deprive the children of the opportunity, if not the right, to grow up in a loving family. Children who grew up in a psychological abusive family, more often become psychologically abusive
all relationships. If a spouse cannot trust the other because the other is a pathological liar, their family relationship will be estranged. As they say, trust
lost is hard to earn back.
Q22: Dr. Camaymayan, did you put your findings in writing? A22: Yes, ma’am.
Q23: I have here a document which purports to be a psychological report on one James Natividad, dated May 2, 2017. Can you please go over it and tell us what it is?
A23: Ma’am, this is the same psychological report that I have made.
Q24: Found on th last page of the same is a signature above a typewritten name Dr. Gil Camaymayan, is that your signature above your name?
A24: Yes, Ma’am.
Q25: I have no further questions. Do you have anything to add or retract, Dr. Camaymayan?
A25: No, Ma’am.
Q26: Are you willing to sign this statement? A26: Yes, Ma’am.
……….
Affiant further sayeth naught.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 10th day of May 2017, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines.
GIL CAMAYMAYAN, Ph.D.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me, this 10th day of May 2017, in Quezon City, Gil Camaymayan, whose signature above appears presented to me his Driver ’s License with License No. NO2-12-011452 issued on December 23, 2016 at the City of Manila.
IVY EDODOLLON
Counsel for Petitioner
SWORN ATTESTATION
I faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions asked and answers given above, and neither did I nor any other person then present or assisting me coached the witness regarding his answers.
IVY EDODOLLON
Counsel for Petitioner
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me, this 10th day of May 2017, in Quezon City, IVY EDODOLLON, the person whose signature above appears presented to me her IBP ID with Roll of Attorneys No. 64523 issued on May 23, 2016 at the City of Manila.
Doc No. 9; FREDERICK BARCELON
Page No. 2; Notary Public
Book No. 4; Appointment No. 5035345 Series of 2017. Until 31 December 2017
Roll No. 91223
IBP No. 654077/ 12-31-2014 PTR No. 14434876/ 12-01-2017 MCLE 5 Compliance No. 00123; 9/16/16
Commission Serial No.: M-007
Copy furnished:
GOMERIANO V. AMURAO
Counsel for Respondent
BRONDIAL AMURAO AGUILAR & ASSOCIATES
