A new precedent

A judge has sentenced a woman to back $14,000 worth of child support to the main she claimed was the father, but actually wasn't. This is the first time that the decision has gone this way. In every other case that I know about, the men have had no chance of recouping the payments they made to the women who cockolded and defrauded them, due to the relationships they have built with the children, the possibility of those relationship being damaged, and the fact that them woman "needs" the money for the child.

This is pretty much the only area of the law I know about where fraud is rewarded. But, as Goebbels said (paraphrased), "Just tell them it's for the sake of the children, and they'll accept anything".