Meghan King Edmonds loses custody of kids to Jim Edmonds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:

"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.

She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.

People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.

The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.

Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.

Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.

I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.

But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.

It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."

I get this, but the posts about the sick child are major red flags. Is that a reaction to extreme stress?

[Anonymous]

Someone who marries some she met six weeks ago, moves her kids into this man’s home, is willing to move her and the kids across the country to be with him, and then ends the marriage two months later isn’t in the right frame of mind to be raising kids. That lack of judgment and poor decision making and impulsivity isn’t healthy at all for kids.

I am sure the Meghan fan club posters will blame that poor judgment and decision making on Jim too but in reality Meghan is responsible for her own decisions and choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:

"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.

She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.

People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.

The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.

Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.

Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.

I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.

But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.

It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."

This. Absolutely this.

LOUDER, for the people in the back.

Not all of think that it is okay for children to be harmed or killed based on a biased belief that children should always be with their mothers and that men or fathers are evil. Would you like me to share a list of mothers who have harmed or killed their kids? Advocating for mothers blindly at the expense of their kids is shameful. The kids matter and they have a right to a safe and stable lives. There is nothing about being a woman or man that makes one a better parent. And anyone, man or woman, can say they aren’t responsible for their behaviour, they can say that all their actions are reactions to other people or to trauma - but at the end of the day when those actions and reactions harm the kids, they shouldn’t have custody.

The courts are not anti mothers in the least. They were very anti fathers for years and now that they are becoming less biased and including fathers more in custody and care, that is a good thing, it isn’t anti mothers.

There are many YouTube channels that play live family court cases - you can watch thousands of family court cases. There is definitely no anti mother bias. What you do see though is both mothers and fathers being the ones who are making decisions in the best interest of their kids and mothers and fathers who aren’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if there was some kind of medical abuse / munchausen’s happening. The child she referred to as ‘severely disabled’ and who issues she posted about day and night. That is likely the child she was also self medicating. It will be interesting to see if once he is away from her if he still has all the same issues and if he is actually severely disabled.

There is no evidence about the ritual allegation. None of the tabloids has posted an actual, named source. At best, it's an attention-seeking Real Housewives alumna who said it because CPS would not turn over that information to them. Deep dive into Reddit suggests that this past year, after Jim moved to Tennessee, Meghan became a bit unhinged with sending emails to the school about pickups and how he'd moved away, etc. If anyone has credible evidence about the Ritalin allegation naming a real source, it would be nice to read it, because I'm so perplexed. No question Meghan has some issues, but you would have to be straight up insane, as a divorced parent in a high-conflict coparenting situation, to give your kid ritalin that you purchased on the black market without a prescription and ask a school employee to administer it? Like, totally insane. You would have to be insane even if you weren't divorced. Meghan - not popular right now, but insane? There has to be more to the story. Like, perhaps she got him a prescription for her child without Jim's consent, which is an issue if he has joint legal decision-making. That would still be a serious problem, but not the sensational story that Jim's team is spinning to the media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:

"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.

She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.

People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.

The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.

Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.

Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.

I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.

But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.

It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."

I get this, but the posts about the sick child are major red flags. Is that a reaction to extreme stress?

They are in poor judgment, and perhaps we should change our laws to make it illegal to post things about your kids on social media?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.

Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?

The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.

Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.

Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.

She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.

+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.

I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.

You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.

You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.

Pot meet kettle.

[Anonymous]

When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.

Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?

The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.

Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.

Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.

She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.

+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.

I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.

You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.

You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.

Pot meet kettle.

You have a reading comprehension problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.

Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?

The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.

Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.

Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.

She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.

+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.

I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.

You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.

You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.

Pot meet kettle.

You have a reading comprehension problem.

Nope. You’re just so deep into your online fantasies that you can’t see how disturbed Meghan has been over the years. All from her own POV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?

They only recently moved FT to TN. Meghan lost custody in October.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?

He bought a house and moved to Tennessee in "part-time" in 2025 - I think part of her "breakdown" was that his move shifted more of the parenting responsibilities that they had previously shared to her, so she became an almost full-time parent of 3 kids, at least one of which she said had special needs, plus she was working. Also, he was allegedly bullying her at custody exchanges and through his attorneys. And he married her friend, a pornstar, with whom they had a 3-some, and coparenting with the two of them was also probably not easy. I feel sorry for her. Though she never should have married, signed a prenup, and had babies with a twice-divorced man who already had two sets of kids and is a known cheater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?

Usually you **cannot** move out of state like that without having it negatively affect your custody, obviously (meaning Jim). Because, yes, you can't share something like week on/week off custody across TWO states. You just can't do that. But, dirtbag Jim has unlimited resources with the ability to pay for a high-powered legal team AND there is a lot of collusion and corruption in the St. Louis family court system (please see the recent articles about the federal lawsuit brought against the family court system there). So one possibility is that a corrupt family court judge in Edmonds' pocket approved the move and who knows what was done with the custody schedule arrangement. Calling Meghan "unhinged" (PP upthread) when dealing with something like that is not nice and also indicative of not understanding the workings of shared custody and family court.

Him up and moving to Tennessee like that, while his kids lives have always been in St. Louis (including school, friends, etc) is a HUGE red flag. In my opinion, that was one of the steps in some nasty grand plan of his. And now to have the children ripped away from their lives in St. Louis and suddenly and permanently moved to Tennessee is absolutely unconscionable and this entire thing is disgusting (but not surprising when you are stuck in a custody situation with someone like Jim).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?

They only recently moved FT to TN. Meghan lost custody in October.

Yes, it apparently was part-time earlier this year, until the kids were taken from Meghan and he could taken them to TN and complete his objective of being in TN full-time without having to deal with shared custody. Remember, he sold his property in St. Louis last year, so that was step one in whatever grand plan he had.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.

Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?

The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.

Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.

Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.

She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.

+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.

I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.

You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.

You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.

Pot meet kettle.

You have a reading comprehension problem.

Nope. You’re just so deep into your online fantasies that you can’t see how disturbed Meghan has been over the years. All from her own POV.

Of course it's your prerogative to be an apologist and supporter of malignant narcissist abusers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.

Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?

The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.

Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.

Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.

She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.

+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.

I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.

You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.

You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.

Pot meet kettle.

You have a reading comprehension problem.

Nope. You’re just so deep into your online fantasies that you can’t see how disturbed Meghan has been over the years. All from her own POV.

Of course it's your prerogative to be an apologist and supporter of malignant narcissist abusers.

Again, pot meet kettle.