Myka Stauffer of The Stauffer Life: Where's Huxley???

[JermajestyDuggar]

9 minutes ago, mhainlen said:

would the Stauffers have rehomed a child requiring surgeries and chemotherapy and radiation? Or would that just have been used for more instagram posts and influencer points? 

The second part. Kids going through cancer treatment get way more donations, views, and sympathy on social media. I know of so many fundraisers and benefits for children fighting cancer. And then when they get to ring the bell, everyone is overjoyed. Cancer wouldn’t be something they will have to deal with for the next 20 years. But autism is. You can’t ever ring the bell because you beat autism. 

[HarryPotterFan]

I had a thought earlier tonight...know what would have been great? If the Stauffers used their platform for advocacy. They could have talked about international adoption, told prospective adoptive parents that there are things you can’t prepare for, that sometimes you aren’t given an honest picture. And if you can’t handle that, it’s not for you. Or they could have partnered with an org like the Autism Society and talked about the long wait times for diagnoses, the wait times for therapy, the expense of therapy. They could have campaigned to get more therapies covered by insurance. But no. Doing any of that would mean admitting that everything isn’t perfect all the time, that they aren’t a perfectly staged family. So they didn’t. 

[SolomonFundy]

4 hours ago, Queen Of Hearts said:

You assume anything Myka said was true. I think she is a lying liar who lies. The doctor may have cautioned them on the amount of care Huxley would need, but I doubt they said 'don't do it.'

Agreed. The wording of this (which I know is very much the same verbiage that the Stauffers have used repeatedly now) is so telling. The takeaway from this type of statement is that they see Huxley as damaged, unworthy of a "real" family, and they feel that other people must see things that way too.

To make it even more disgusting, they curated that obnoxious video around the toxic idea that people would "side" with them against their abandoned toddler son if they revealed that they always knew he wasn't worthy of their love, but they were generous enough to give him a trial run anyway.

[Aine]

On 5/30/2020 at 8:53 AM, JermajestyDuggar said:

I have been searching and searching and I can’t find the episode or even the family name. It was so long ago I’m starting to wonder if it was a different show about adopting altogether. But I really think it was Adoption Stories on Discovery and TLC. We know TLC will run some shows with pretty awful families and act like they are great people...

Someone may have answered this already or suggested it (I'm catching up on pages of this thread!) but is there any chance it was an episode of 'Adoption' on the Hallmark Channel? I remember watching all episodes of that show over and over because there was only a couple of seasons during my teenage years. I think I remember the episode as well, but I think it was on 'Adoption' and on Hallmark, not TLC or Discovery.

[JermajestyDuggar]

4 minutes ago, Aine said:

Someone may have answered this already or suggested it (I'm catching up on pages of this thread!) but is there any chance it was an episode of 'Adoption' on the Hallmark Channel? I remember watching all episodes of that show over and over because there was only a couple of seasons during my teenage years. I think I remember the episode as well, but I think it was on 'Adoption' and on Hallmark, not TLC or Discovery.

I believe those are two different shows. Because I never had The Hallmark Channel back then. But I watched a lot of TLC.

[Mudgie]

At the risk of sounding like an armchair psychologist, I think anytime a family chooses to turn themselves and their children into commodities and broadcasts every moment of their lives for public consumption you can be fairly certain you're dealing with extreme narcissism. 

I find the entire YouTube and Instagram influencer phenomenon involving children reprehensible simply due to the fact that the children have zero legal and financial protection from their parents pimping them out for view and dollars. At least the film and television industry has child labor laws in place in some effort to protect kids.

To take a vulnerable child, one who has had every single thing that is familiar ripped away from them and then broadcast that childs struggles and challenges for views, all the while publicly broadcasting your own "reactions" to it, is just a level of narcissism I will never comprehend. 

This is not something any of their children will ever fully psychologically recover from. Ever.

[JermajestyDuggar]

1 hour ago, Mudgie said:

At the risk of sounding like an armchair psychologist, I think anytime a family chooses to turn themselves and their children into commodities and broadcasts every moment of their lives for public consumption you can be fairly certain you're dealing with extreme narcissism. 

I find the entire YouTube and Instagram influencer phenomenon involving children reprehensible simply due to the fact that the children have zero legal and financial protection from their parents pimping them out for view and dollars. At least the film and television industry has child labor laws in place in some effort to protect kids.

To take a vulnerable child, one who has had every single thing that is familiar ripped away from them and then broadcast that childs struggles and challenges for views, all the while publicly broadcasting your own "reactions" to it, is just a level of narcissism I will never comprehend. 

This is not something any of their children will ever fully psychologically recover from. Ever.

I agree and I want to point out the stereotype of the “stage mom” in Hollywood. I kind of see these influencers and vloggers who exploit their children for views, fame, and money are “stage moms” times 100.  

[SuperSluth]

22 hours ago, sparrow said:

I saw that a couple people on here referenced the parents being encouraged by doctors NOT to adopt Huxley... after his MRI / CT results were reviewed. Am trying to wrap my head around this. What could a doctor have seen that would cause them to discourage adoption? Wouldn’t the doctors WANT to see the child adopted? Particularly if he had special needs.  Or, better yet, wouldn’t the doctor’s role be to just present the medical facts and not  to offer their opinions on the child’s worthiness to be an addition to the family. It just seems like a weird overstepping of bounds to me. Am I wrong? 

I think doctors that do this type of consulting give the cold hard truth when it comes to medical issues... otherwise parents come back saying "you didnt notice XYZ in my baby that I just bought".

And I do remember that adoption story of the couple who went to Ukraine for a white baby... they were super-worried about fetal alcohol syndrome.

Edited June 6, 2020 by SuperSluth

[sparrow]

Found this article from last year. (https://www.moms.com/myka-stauffer-gets-real-sharing-the-hardships-of-adoption/)

Many of these statements did not age well. 

Some highlights: (bolding and reaction emojis mine)

Moms.com recently had the opportunity to chat with Stauffer about [...] how the challenges of adopting a special needs child further fortified her own personal character trait of not giving up.

“I prayed for a sign that if this was supposed to be our child [...] let us have the same birthday or just like one day apart. It was bizarre, but sure enough our birthdays are very close.” ?

“When we brought him home, the only thing he would do was rock and bang his head against the wall.” ?

“for me, it made me want to fight for him more. That's my personality. I'm a perfectionist. I'm a fighter. I am an advocate. If you tell me no, I'll say yes, and find a way to make it work”

”For many parents who have adopted, it’s true that you paint that picture in your head of what your child is going to look like and be like, and then when the child arrives, there’s a big adjustment period. My son has taught me to chill out and to realize that it doesn't matter what your persona is. You are my baby and I'm going to love you unconditionally.”

“I know that he is supposed to be with us and our family. Maybe, because we're brave enough or crazy enough to say that imperfection doesn't scare us.” 

———

What a difference a year makes...

Edited June 6, 2020 by sparrow
Clarity

[BookwormExtraordinaire]

In the long run, I hope this will turn out better for Huxley than staying with two parents who are clearly not capable (or more likely, willing) to meet his specific needs. There are no guarantees, however, and being uprooted a second time so early on in life cannot possibly be good for him. I agree with previous posters who have said that the Stauffers mostly seemed interested in adopting a special-needs child from abroad to make themselves look better on social media, and that they were not prepared for the reality of caring for a child like Huxley. 
 

The only good I can possibly see coming out of this mess is if it sparks a proper debate on the ethics of parents making money by featuring young children on social media. Children who cannot give consent or even understand what YouTube, Instagram or the internet is. I think family vlogging is truly vile, and I hope it will die out in the near future, but nothing attracts an audience like babies and as long as parents can make money off of it, there will be some willing to exploit their own children. It has been around long enough by now that some kids that are not so young anymore have literally grown up on camera, with their entire childhoods available for the world to see, and I would not be surprised if some of them are going to voice some pretty strong opinions about that once they reach early adulthood. 

[Aine]

On 6/3/2020 at 5:39 AM, Glasgowghirl said:

James is getting it to, It was Myka who posted about Huxley on youtube most and who is most active on social media so she got most of the anger directed at her but no one is letting James off. 

I also think that James actually showed real emotion in that vlog explanation they put up. Myka kept making crying sounds or wiping "tears" from her eyes but she absolutely was not crying and her glasses didn't even slightly fog up once. James shed genuine tears. He is just as culpable, don't get me wrong, but his emotions seemed very real. I'd love to know what happened behind closed doors and what was discussed between those parents. We know Myka is manipulative as all get-out seeing that manipulating others with what she shares about her and her family's life is what many people are extra upset by with Huxley's rehoming. I'm not one to put more blame on the mother or a female in the situation but it would not surprise me if she sold the rehoming idea to her husband by expressing an inability to cope or she was having a breakdown or something emotionally manipulative that meant he was choosing between his wife and other childrens' wellbeing and Huxley. Not okay at all. EVER. He equally made the decision to give away their child but he appeared to genuinely be experiencing strong emotions around their decision. Myka absolutely was not genuine.

[JermajestyDuggar]

3 minutes ago, Aine said:

I also think that James actually showed real emotion in that vlog explanation they put up. Myka kept making crying sounds or wiping "tears" from her eyes but she absolutely was not crying and her glasses didn't even slightly fog up once. James shed genuine tears. He is just as culpable, don't get me wrong, but his emotions seemed very real. I'd love to know what happened behind closed doors and what was discussed between those parents. We know Myka is manipulative as all get-out seeing that manipulating others with what she shares about her and her family's life is what many people are extra upset by with Huxley's rehoming. I'm not one to put more blame on the mother or a female in the situation but it would not surprise me if she sold the rehoming idea to her husband by expressing an inability to cope or she was having a breakdown or something emotionally manipulative that meant he was choosing between his wife and other childrens' wellbeing and Huxley. Not okay at all. EVER. He equally made the decision to give away their child but he appeared to genuinely be experiencing strong emotions around their decision. Myka absolutely was not genuine.

This is all speculation but it makes me wonder if he was able to bond with Huxley easier because he’s already bonded with a child that isn’t biologically his (their oldest daughter is from Myka’s previous relationship). 

[Aine]

10 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

This is all speculation but it makes me wonder if he was able to bond with Huxley easier because he’s already bonded with a child that isn’t biologically his (their oldest daughter is from Myka’s previous relationship).

I think that could definitely be a factor, I forgot that the oldest daughter was from a previous relationship.

[Aine]

On 6/4/2020 at 10:06 PM, mhainlen said:

 They probably didn’t straight up say “You shouldn’t adopt this child.” Children with special needs can be difficult to find placements for and perhaps the orphanage thought “brain tumor” would garner more sympathy and be more acceptable to an American adoptive family than reactive attachment disorder. And I can’t help but wonder if this would have been right - would the Stauffers have rehomed a child requiring surgeries and chemotherapy and radiation? Or would that just have been used for more instagram posts and influencer points? 

I think "brain tumor" seemed 'less permanent' in some way to the Stauffers? As though it could be cut out or treated with chemo/radiation, have some rehab, and he'd be close to what they consider to be 'normal' or he'd die from his condition. Either way, kids with brain tumors, whether cancerous or benign, are instant clickbait. It generates an incredible amount of interest, sympathy, compassion, and people opening their wallets.

Of course, most children with brain tumors have permanent deficits that range from mild (like an attention deficit, impaired fine motor skills, or a learning disorder) to profound and requiring life long management and care. I used to work at one of the super famous research hospitals that are known for treating kids with cancer with no medical bills, and the majority of my job was assessing the kids' adaptive functioning (social skills, fine and gross motor skills, personal care etc) and cognitive abilities so we could monitor for changes over time and intervene to preserve or reteach as much as possible.

I bet Myka thought she'd be able to 'handle' a tumor because of all the attention it would have brought her, no matter the outcome for Huxley ?

[Bubbacat]

Mom of a child adopted from China through the Special Needs program.

China has been a special needs only program for years now. However, it's important to note that Myka opted to adopt a child from the special focus list - China's program to find families for especially hard to place children. These are kids in state care with significant medical or developmental needs, whose prospects for placement with families in China are slim.

Myka chose to adopt a special focus child (her husband signed off but I'm willing to bet she ran the show). They chose to ignore advice by the US medical professionals they hired to review Huxley's medical record (agencies usually require prospective parents to obtain at least one review). And worst of all, they chose to monetize that poor little boy from the day they went public with their first "We're Adopting!" fundraiser. 

I am very sure that the Chinese goverment is taking a dim view of this. The US State Dept too.

How this debacle will impact waiting kids is anyone's guess. But I don't think it'll be good.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Bubbacat

[hoipolloi]

According to a couple of their critics, Myka and James Stauffer are now making copyright claims -- and getting the money -- for any other YouTube videos that include clips of the Stauffers' YT videos. 

Not knowing how the world of YT influencers works, it's not clear to me if these claims are just about the money or a roundabout way to try and shut their critics down.

[Alisamer]

On 6/4/2020 at 11:06 PM, mhainlen said:

...And I can’t help but wonder if this would have been right - would the Stauffers have rehomed a child requiring surgeries and chemotherapy and radiation? Or would that just have been used for more instagram posts and influencer points? 

I think the Stauffers seem to be the type of people who are willing to take a special needs kid, IF they either 1) have a very easy-to-handle need or 2) have something severe enough that they can have fundraisers and a Make-A-Wish trip and ALLLLLL the attention that they could milk from it. Severe enough to need in-home care, preferably, so the nurse or nanny can do much of the work. (And in both cases, the kid needs to be cute.)

Huxley unfortunately fell in the middle - not easy to handle, but also not something curable or life-threatening so they could do fundraisers and go on the local news and all that. He's really cute, though!

[Aine]

2 hours ago, Alisamer said:

I think the Stauffers seem to be the type of people who are willing to take a special needs kid, IF they either 1) have a very easy-to-handle need or 2) have something severe enough that they can have fundraisers and a Make-A-Wish trip and ALLLLLL the attention that they could milk from it. Severe enough to need in-home care, preferably, so the nurse or nanny can do much of the work. (And in both cases, the kid needs to be cute.)

Huxley unfortunately fell in the middle - not easy to handle, but also not something curable or life-threatening so they could do fundraisers and go on the local news and all that. He's really cute, though!

What's interesting with Huxley is that I'm not sure he really did fall in the middle. I wouldn't be prone to diagnosing autism when we don't have his full history or interviews with informants from the first 2 yrs of his life and he has had to adjust to learning a new language, having parents and being given affection, having to form an attachment to these two new adults in his life while there are 3 other children in the home and a breastfed infant that is also building an attachment to the same parents at the same time, and the chaos of having 4 siblings. He doesn't show a large amount of typical behaviors of "severe autism" in the videos. He makes eye contact, self-stims are minimal and the kid needs to get some comfort from somewhere, and him not being verbal in English yet is not a huge concern given the trauma of being adopted, learning to be in a family, learning a new language and new social cues and the hectic environment he was placed in.

If I did his autism assessment, I'd likely defer diagnosis and instead recommend therapy for speech, parent training around attachment/language development/routine etc., and ABA therapy for things like fine/gross motor deficits and everyday living skills and reassess in 18 mths to 2 yrs. There are too many factors in his life that could be causing autism-like symptoms that I'd expect to see in any child with his history and environment. ?‍♀️

I don't personally know a psychologist who would slap an ASD diagnosis on him that quickly.

[OhNoNike]

Without a crystal ball did have a screenshot where Myka asked what type of disability isn’t a big deal but that other people find a big deal.  I think it was when she was looking for a second adoption.  But she posted it in an adoption forum. 

I thought that spoke a lot. 

[OhNoNike]

Proof (screenshot from Without a Crystal Ball’s YouTube)

Spoiler

And two additional ones. 
 

Spoiler

 

 

[Queen Of Hearts]

39 minutes ago, OhNoNike said:

Proof (screenshot from Without a Crystal Ball’s YouTube)

  Hide contents

And two additional ones. 
 

  Hide contents

 

 

I like how she always uses 'my husband wants to know' in her questions. I'd bet money that was all 100% her.

[SeverelyServingJeebus]

On 5/26/2020 at 1:10 PM, Stormy said:

And I'm half-convinced that FJ had something to do with Sissy successfully getting away from Kimi, with how many people were talking about filing a report

Sissy got away? Has there been an update somewhere on this family? I followed the blog for years and its disappearance is actually what brought me to FJ in the first place. 

[Aine]

2 hours ago, SeverelyServingJeebus said:

Sissy got away? Has there been an update somewhere on this family? I followed the blog for years and its disappearance is actually what brought me to FJ in the first place. 

@Stormy , I also would love an update on this if we know about Sissy! I think of Kimi's poor girls often.

[Maggie Mae]

It's toward the end of this thread: 

 

It's toward the end of this thread: 

Or this one: 

 

[Toothfairy]

On 6/3/2020 at 10:14 PM, MirrorMirror said:

I second ALL. OF. THIS. To emphasize the bolded, the group home my husband and I were houseparents at had many of our children come from an online FB group for rehoming. The Admin sent her daughter to our home after she had lived with them for 11 years! Then anyone who had an "issue" with their child, she would legit hand out our number like she was recommending her pool guy.

It was a public group (don't even get me started on that. You are talking about minors here folks!), & another housemother and I used to lurk on there all the time.

There are also unlicensed Christian ranches for kids who are rehomed. One shutdown after a series of sexual abuse going on. It was very popular and had many international adoptees. 

One of my kids was rehomed via a bus to meet her new family until they didn't want her anymore. Her adoptive parents literally packed her bag and put her on a bus with documents to meet the family they met online. 

On 6/5/2020 at 6:13 PM, Mudgie said:

At the risk of sounding like an armchair psychologist, I think anytime a family chooses to turn themselves and their children into commodities and broadcasts every moment of their lives for public consumption you can be fairly certain you're dealing with extreme narcissism. 

I find the entire YouTube and Instagram influencer phenomenon involving children reprehensible simply due to the fact that the children have zero legal and financial protection from their parents pimping them out for view and dollars. At least the film and television industry has child labor laws in place in some effort to protect kids.

To take a vulnerable child, one who has had every single thing that is familiar ripped away from them and then broadcast that childs struggles and challenges for views, all the while publicly broadcasting your own "reactions" to it, is just a level of narcissism I will never comprehend. 

This is not something any of their children will ever fully psychologically recover from. Ever.

I agree. I dislike YouTube families. The child's entire life is online. I especially hate foster parents and adoptive parents showing the child off. Even when foster parents blur the face out. There are so many influencers who only care about money and attention. They'll do anything for it. Myka showed the child's tantrums too. That's online forever