Micah Stauffer wanted to adopt a child with special needs, which she believed would be a significant milestone for their YouTube channel and family content.
They created a series of 27 videos documenting the adoption process, including fundraising where donors received exclusive content like puzzle pieces and mentions in H's baby book.
The public accused them of adopting H solely for content and financial gain, leading to a petition and severe backlash that eventually took down their channels.
Currently, there are no federal protections for children's privacy, labor, or income from online content. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and Children's Internet Protection Act focus on data collection and obscene content, not family content.
The Coogan Act regulates child actors' working hours and requires 15% of their earnings to be placed in a trust until they turn 18. This protection does not extend to child influencers on platforms like YouTube.
He was removed from the custody of his parents, Heather and Michael Martin, and now lives with his biological mother, who reports he is healing and doing well.
Heather and Michael Martin realized that more intense pranks and emotional reactions from their children led to higher engagement and views, which they sought to maximize for the channel's success.
The Stauffer family was accused of adopting a boy from China for social media clout, only to abandon him when it got too hard. What's the real story behind their decision, and what does that say about other families that put their children all over youtube?
TW: Child Abuse, Child Neglect
Subscribe on Patreon )for bonus content and to become a member of our Rogue Detecting Society. Patrons have access to ad-free listening and bonus content. And members of our High Council on Patreon have access to our after-show called Footnotes.
Apple subscriptions are now live! Get access to ad-free episodes and bonus episodes when you subscribe on Apple Podcasts.
Follow on Tik Tok )and Instagram) for a daily dose of horror.