I was shocked when one of our rugby legends died, not only because he died so young, but because the rugby body, shortly after his death, announced that a trust was set up for raising his sons, but, that his widow was totally excluded. To me it sounded that she was made into the unlucky last of his many wives instead of honoured as the mother of his sons. I do not know this mother, but speaking from my own experience, I know that to care for children while you find yourself uncared for is creating much pain for the children. This is perhaps why she felt that she had to try and rescue the situation by allegedly tampering with the company records, which could be seen by some as fraud. Beware: Crime breads crime! I do not say that she had to be looked after similarly to the children, but, I got the impression that her needs as the mother were not considered at all. There must be a way to care for someone while making sure that it cannot be misused. The father of my children did not die, but in the Family Court, I was stripped of everything I ever had and his female lawyer later told me face-to-face: We cannot give you [and the children] one of the six [co-owned] houses as you will then lose your benefit! With no relatives to turn to for help and support, I was forced to live on social welfare; at best a refuse and at worst a trap. Doing whatever it takes to make sure that what happened to me will not happen to my daughters, I now teach them that to best serve your children or husband or manager, you have to put yourself first. Never ever again will I let it be okay for a mother to take the second place!