Reply to Meghan King Edmonds loses custody of kids to Jim Edmonds

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Meghan King Edmonds loses custody of kids to Jim Edmonds"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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."[/quote]

This. Absolutely this.

LOUDER, for the people in the back.
[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. 
[/quote]

Are you a lawyer or a judge? In what capacity have you been in the family court system for 10 years? Or are you just talking about your own personal experience with you and your court case?[/quote]
You know the answer to this…same as One Mom…[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics