Boy's mother referred to him as "my son" three times, "our son" once and "our kids" once. When she used the phrase "our son," it involved the court battle with his father over custody. When she used the phrase "our kids," she was referring to kids she has with her husband, in addition to this particular boy.
She also refers to the boy's father as "my ex" on several occasions and "the father."
As I mentioned in several articles of mine, in using such terms, she essentially de-parented the boy's father. In so doing, she enabled herself to treat him in ways she would never have treated her son's father. It is the same tactic that the military uses to dehumanize "the enemy."
She also mentions that she and the boy's father "just resolved a very difficult and contentious custody battle" and that she "won." Guess what? If she won, it means that they didn't resolve the matter -- a judge did. In so doing, a win/lose dynamic was created.
She claims that the boy's father already had time with him and was attempting to gain more time, but that "because of issues at his house, [she and her husband] resisted allowing this." If such issues impacted the safety and well-being of their son, she would have been fighting to reduce his time with their son, not merely prevent him from gaining more time.
I'm afraid that from reading between the lines, the boy's mother is by no means a saint and may well have greatly contributed to the problems at hand. In fact, I would bet my bottom dollar that some, if not all, of the information about the mother being conveyed by the boy's father is accurate.
Oh, parents, I am never surprised and regularly disgusted with the harm you inflict on your children because you are more interested in "winning" than with doing what is in the best interest of your children. It all comes down to poor parenting and arguably child abuse, IMHO.