Meghan King Edmonds loses custody of kids to Jim Edmonds

[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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Please state how many years you have been in the family court system. I have been in 10 years now. I have have friends who have been in longer. I have read countless cases and witnesses many hearings. You do not know what you are talking about. Watching YouTube does not make you an expert. You also talk in these ridiculous hyperbolic absolutes "Advocating for mothers blindly at the expense of their kids is shameful", which also shows your ignorance.

Your "anti-fathers for years" statement needs more backstory - until the 80s, yes, mothers were favored in family court due to things like the tender years doctrine. But now the pendulum has swung to the opposite end, especially in the cases of protective mothers vs abuser fathers, which is ALSO not good. Please read Joan Meier's published research on protective mothers and family court. It is staggering.

What the post from OMB is talking about *in this particular case, and other cases like it* is what happens when you end up in the system with a powerful and wealthy personality-disordered abuser.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

Right? All PP can do is stamp her foot and scream ABUSIVE!!!! NARCISSIST!!!! WEALTHY!!!! And everyone is to believe there is some big conspiracy against Meghan instead of what she herself has presented over the last decade.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

Right? All PP can do is stamp her foot and scream ABUSIVE!!!! NARCISSIST!!!! WEALTHY!!!! And everyone is to believe there is some big conspiracy against Meghan instead of what she herself has presented over the last decade.

Sorry you're confused. I'm the PP above you and I was referring to the "pot meet kettle" guy.

[Anonymous]

Hard to believe, but in the 2000s, Jim Edmonds was actually quite the eligible bachelor in St. Louis due to being part of a really great Cardinals team. I could see how Meghan ignored the red flags when they met.

I lived in STL and followed Meghan early on social media. Looking back, I can see now that some of her posts - even going back 15 years - were really manic. It wouldn't surprise me if she had mental illness. Add in 3 kids in 2 years, a cheating spouse and other stressors... and I imagine she just broke. To me, her oversharing on social media seems like a cry for help.

I don't know that Edmonds is the monster people are making him out to be. I guess it's good he and his wife are stepping up with the kids. But to move his kids to TN at a time when they probably really need their mother and some assurance she's going to be okay... I dunno. Seems like it would've been better for them to relocate back to STL and help Meghan get the help she needs.

Her family was a nice, normal St. Louis family back in the day. I wonder if they are trying to stay involved in the kids' lives. I imagine it's really tough when your daughter's ex has unlimited funds and is revered in STL.

Poor kids. I hope Jim is being a good father and that their mom gets well.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

Right? All PP can do is stamp her foot and scream ABUSIVE!!!! NARCISSIST!!!! WEALTHY!!!! And everyone is to believe there is some big conspiracy against Meghan instead of what she herself has presented over the last decade.

Sorry you're confused. I'm the PP above you and I was referring to the "pot meet kettle" guy.

Lol, that went right over your head again.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

Right? All PP can do is stamp her foot and scream ABUSIVE!!!! NARCISSIST!!!! WEALTHY!!!! And everyone is to believe there is some big conspiracy against Meghan instead of what she herself has presented over the last decade.

Sorry you're confused. I'm the PP above you and I was referring to the "pot meet kettle" guy.

Lol, that went right over your head again.

Nope, I knew exactly what you were doing, hence my response. Looks like it worked. Cheers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hard to believe, but in the 2000s, Jim Edmonds was actually quite the eligible bachelor in St. Louis due to being part of a really great Cardinals team. I could see how Meghan ignored the red flags when they met.

I lived in STL and followed Meghan early on social media. Looking back, I can see now that some of her posts - even going back 15 years - were really manic. It wouldn't surprise me if she had mental illness. Add in 3 kids in 2 years, a cheating spouse and other stressors... and I imagine she just broke. To me, her oversharing on social media seems like a cry for help.

I don't know that Edmonds is the monster people are making him out to be. I guess it's good he and his wife are stepping up with the kids. But to move his kids to TN at a time when they probably really need their mother and some assurance she's going to be okay... I dunno. Seems like it would've been better for them to relocate back to STL and help Meghan get the help she needs.

Her family was a nice, normal St. Louis family back in the day. I wonder if they are trying to stay involved in the kids' lives. I imagine it's really tough when your daughter's ex has unlimited funds and is revered in STL.

Poor kids. I hope Jim is being a good father and that their mom gets well.

This is a really balanced take. The posters that keep screaming at Jim need to really look long and hard at how Meghan presents herself. Meghan has also been married 3 times. Jim was not at fault for 2 of those marriages. There has been something wrong with Meghan for years and she needs to address it. Hopefully she now has the space to do it.

I agree on them leaving the area too. I know they agreed out of court, but I wish the courts had intervened to not allow the kids to have been moved from STL. At least for the remainder of this school year. There has been too much upheaval over the last few months for those kids. They deserve stability. And even if Meghan couldn’t have independent custody, it’s very unfortunate that she couldn’t have had a few hours a month of supervised visitation (maybe that is happening but she didn’t want the supervised visitation continue to be publicized). Like at her parent’s house so that the kids are at a familiar place. The kids are so young that to have Meghan disappear for months at a time isn’t good for their mental health.

[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:

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.

This is hilarious and definitely a very juvenile "I know you are, but what am I" style of comebacks.

Right? All PP can do is stamp her foot and scream ABUSIVE!!!! NARCISSIST!!!! WEALTHY!!!! And everyone is to believe there is some big conspiracy against Meghan instead of what she herself has presented over the last decade.

Sorry you're confused. I'm the PP above you and I was referring to the "pot meet kettle" guy.

Lol, that went right over your head again.

Nope, I knew exactly what you were doing, hence my response. Looks like it worked. Cheers!

Lol. You’re so bad at pretending you know what’s going on. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hard to believe, but in the 2000s, Jim Edmonds was actually quite the eligible bachelor in St. Louis due to being part of a really great Cardinals team. I could see how Meghan ignored the red flags when they met.

I lived in STL and followed Meghan early on social media. Looking back, I can see now that some of her posts - even going back 15 years - were really manic. It wouldn't surprise me if she had mental illness. Add in 3 kids in 2 years, a cheating spouse and other stressors... and I imagine she just broke. To me, her oversharing on social media seems like a cry for help.

I don't know that Edmonds is the monster people are making him out to be. I guess it's good he and his wife are stepping up with the kids. But to move his kids to TN at a time when they probably really need their mother and some assurance she's going to be okay... I dunno. Seems like it would've been better for them to relocate back to STL and help Meghan get the help she needs.

Her family was a nice, normal St. Louis family back in the day. I wonder if they are trying to stay involved in the kids' lives. I imagine it's really tough when your daughter's ex has unlimited funds and is revered in STL.

Poor kids. I hope Jim is being a good father and that their mom gets well.

He for sure is well-known and likely has sway in STL, but he is also a known giant a-hole in STL. Local media and fans have widely characterized him as cold, difficult, dismissive, a jerk, narcissistic, insufferable, and on and on.