‘An Update on Our Family’ Explores the Risks of Family Vlogging Beyond Exploitation

HBO’s latest docuseries, An Update on Our Family, revisits the Stauffer family controversy while shedding light on the potential dangers associated with family vlogging, illustrating that the risks extend far beyond mere child exploitation.

Since 2014, Myka and James Stauffer have shared their journey through vlogging, documenting their married life and parenthood. Myka’s channel surged in popularity, reaching over 700, 000 subscribers at its height. Alongside this, they launched a family channel titled The Stauffer Life, where the couple captured their experiences with their three children. In 2016, they publicly announced their plans to adopt a child from China, leading to an emotionally charged two-year process during which they documented every significant moment, including their first meeting with Huxley, his initial words, his first MRI, and the family’s response to his autism diagnosis. Huxley quickly became the focal point of their vlogs, appearing in numerous sponsorships and dominating thumbnails. However, their online presence came crashing down in 2020 after they released a video titled “An Update on Our Family, ” which revealed their decision to rehome Huxley.

Now, five years later, An Update on Our Family revisits this tumultuous chapter, exploring Huxley’s rehoming, the backlash that ensued, and broader implications for the family vlogging phenomenon.

The Impact of Family Vlogging on Children

This docuseries offers a profound commentary on the realm of family vlogging, specifically addressing how children like Huxley represent the “first generation living in social media.” Reporter Stephanie McNeal anticipates that the coming years will be telling as these children mature into adulthood, voicing their experiences and perspectives on their digital childhoods. The overarching question remains: what are the long-term effects of family vlogging not just on children but also on their parents? How might it alter a parent’s judgment, empathy, or psychological state?

The inaugural episode delves into Myka’s rise to fame, particularly focusing on her pregnancy stories. Her birthing journeys attracted significant attention, showcasing “live births” and “home births, ” which fueled viewer interest. While many family vloggers documented pregnancies, the Stauffers uniquely captured their journey through international adoption, drawing an emotionally invested audience eager to witness the process of bringing Huxley home. However, a poignant question arises later in the episode: did they adopt Huxley for the sake of views? Former fan Hannah Cho suggests that YouTube fame could have influenced their decision.

The Misguided Views on Adoption and Fame

The Stauffer saga highlights a profound misinterpretation of the outrage directed at them. As noted in An Update on Our Family, the discussion on platforms such as Reddit reveals that dissolved adoptions are not solely a reflection of parental failure. The issue here is not just about the dissolution but the exploitation of Huxley for digital fame before such a decision was made. Had the Stauffers never filmed Huxley, the backlash may have been significantly less severe. Yet, it provokes further inquiry: would they have adopted him at all without the allure of YouTube?

Dangers of Family Vlogging

The implications of family vlogging are twofold. Firstly, there’s the obvious concern regarding the exploitation of children who cannot provide consent for their lives to be shared online. Secondly, there’s the darker possibility that vlogging fosters poor parenting choices. For example, evidence suggests that Myka’s desire for fame may have prompted her to hastily initiate an adoption. Subsequently, as her viewer metrics began to decline, she rushed to have another child despite already facing challenges with Huxley and her other children. It begs the question: can the pursuit of social media attention validate the monumental life decisions surrounding childbirth or adoption?

In the Stauffer case, the outcome of a dissolved adoption could have been far worse. The troubling reality is that vlogging may lead to even more serious consequences, such as abuse. Notably, the case of DaddyOFive illustrates this point starkly; this family vlogging channel devolved into a platform for cruel pranks on their children, resulting in the loss of custody over the youngest. These examples serve as a stark reminder of the inherent risks in family vlogging.

Numerous cases highlight reckless parenting behaviors driven by the quest for social media validation, raising further concerns about the psychological impacts on parents engaging in this exploitative practice. The allure of significant viewership and subscribers can distort an individual’s sense of judgment and empathy. Most people have not experienced the euphoria associated with viral success or the financial benefits of popular YouTube channels, such as the ability to purchase extravagant items like a $6, 000 Cartier bracelet. This uncertain reality begs the question: what extremes might parents reach for the spotlight, and who will ultimately bear the consequences?

Inevitably, many viewers and policymakers remain passive observers, awaiting insights into the real effects of family vlogging on families. This waiting game amplifies the urgency to critically assess the landscape of family vlogging before more serious repercussions unfold.

Source & Images