UJustMe Wrote:
Apr 02, 2013 7:10 PM
You just don't get it do you! The woman, who could never be called a "mother" in this particular case, intentionally & actively perpetrated a fraud, which is a criminal act, by naming someone in writing in a sworn statement, who wasn't the father of the child(ren). In our legal system, the perpetrator of the crime pays the restitution! I know you just don't have a clue & may never see it, but she (and probably you as well) was very, very wrong!