I post book reviews online. Mostly modest numbers. A few hundred views, a few comments, the occasional fun conversation with strangers about something I loved.
Then one day I opened TikTok and found a swarm of comments on an old review, almost all in French, saying some version of: We’re so glad you’re okay. We’ve been worried about you. We’re happy you’re alive.
Which is… not the normal response to a book about the history of indexes. I mean, I loved it, but...
Long story short: a French TV documentary featured an American boy named Michael McBride whose adoption ended in a way that hit viewers hard. Years later, clips resurfaced on TikTok, went viral, and people started asking: What ever happened to him?
Some of them found me (Michael MacBride) and decided I was the kid. Spoiler: I’m not. But once you’ve been drafted into someone else’s mystery, you either shrug and move on… or you do what I do and start pulling threads.
This page is here so anyone can see what sources exist, follow the trail themselves, and understand what we learned (and what we couldn’t confirm).
Original Facebook post (March 20, 2024):
My TikTok book reviews referenced in that post:
https://www.tiktok.com/@mdmacbride/video/7220479702207647019
https://www.tiktok.com/@mdmacbride/video/7340266215509740830
French TikTok that triggered the wave of comments:
I won't bury the lede. This is likely what you came from, so here's what we know. The rest of the page provides all the nitty gritty in hopes that if you, or someone else, wants to pick up the story and continue the research, we've at least saved you some time.
The story that went viral traces back to a 2018 episode of the French program Enquête Exclusive (M6), titled “Adoption aux USA : un scandaleux marché aux enfants.”
In that documentary, a boy called Michael McBride is shown in a disrupted adoption situation. at the age of 11. The documentary was filmed in 2017, he would be born in 2006 and about ~20 in 2026). The documentary presents the case as an example of “rehoming” or adoption dissolution in the U.S.
A key practical lead that emerged in the investigation is that adoption agencies and related platforms frequently use pseudonyms for children in placement. Names shown on-screen or on websites can be deliberately inaccurate.
Communication with an adoption agency leader indicated that:
Two younger siblings (sister and brother) from the same sibling group were placed through the agency.
The agency contact stated that Michael (the oldest child) was not ultimately adopted through that agency’s placement, and that the social worker involved did not have a clear record of what happened afterward (beyond a belief that he may have remained in care and later "aged out").
A director associated with the documentary provided additional context about Michael’s situation at the time of filming, including that he was living with a local family in the community (not simply “vanishing”), but that follow-up visibility was limited.
Bottom line: we found credible indicators that multiple adults and systems were involved, but hard confirmation of Michael’s later outcome is blocked by confidentiality laws and ethical privacy constraints.
2017--
Footage for the documentary filmed at an unknown time during the year
2018--
February 11 (source documentary airs on M6 in France)
Enquête Exclusive episode: “Adoption aux USA : un scandaleux marché aux enfants.”
https://www.m6.fr/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enf-p_14939
IMDb series page (series-level reference): https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17271876/
May 25 (Belgian media pick-up)
Belgian outlet coverage discussing U.S. adoptive “rehoming” and the broader issue:
https://www.rtl.be/actu/aux-etats-unis-des-parents-se-debarassent-de-leurs-enfants-adoptes-il-fallait/2018-05-25/article/112337
2023--
April 18
A book review unexpectedly becomes (for a long time) the most-viewed video on my account
https://www.tiktok.com/@mdmacbride/video/7220479702207647019
2024--
February (posted earlier, later spikes in views)
Another book review (memoir by an adoptee) has unusually high views, adding to the odd pattern
https://www.tiktok.com/@mdmacbride/video/7340266215509740830
March 19–20
French-language comments surge on older TikToks. A mistaken-identity mini-mob forms around the idea that I am the “missing” Michael McBride.
Original FB write-up: https://www.facebook.com/chyken/posts/pfbid02WbQw2Ck6hYrX5KiYvp6WGUJBSR13atf9gSstTDokuFdVCrQtq5oSQvprmBVg3Hbhl
2025--
Early 2025 (renewed wave of attention on French TikTok)
Clips circulate again; commenters intensify the “what happened to Michael?” question.
May–June 2025 (agency outreach begins)
Initial outreach to adoption agency channels and related platforms, after identifying an agency name/logo in circulated clips and screenshots.
June 2025 (key agency response)
An adoption agency leader confirms pseudonym use on public-facing child profiles and offers limited reassurance, while declining identifying details.
Late June 2025 (new complication introduced)
Information emerges that the case involved a sibling group; the agency contact indicates only the younger siblings were placed through their agency, and Michael’s later outcome is unclear through official channels.
July 2025 (documentary-maker contact opens)
A director associated with the documentary shares contextual recollections about the filming period, including short-term stability for Michael at that time, but limited long-term traceability
August 2025 (final outreach attempts in this phase)
Outreach to the agency counselor identified on-screen; no response received and our trail essentially ends
Role: The child at the center of the 2018 documentary segment and the later TikTok identity mix-up.
Why relevant: His name match with Michael MacBride is what accidentally kicked off the whole investigation, and his case is the clearest “rehoming/adoption dissolution” narrative thread people are trying to get closure on.
Names used in the material:
“Michael” / “Michael McBride” (as written in public synopses for the episode)
“Little Michael McBride” or "Little Michael" (how social posts/clips often referred to him)
“Matt” (a pseudonym shown in materials connected to AdoptionBridge; also referred to as “Matt/Michael” in later correspondence)
What the documentary publicly claims/shows (high level):
Location at the time: North Carolina
Age at the time: 11 (but, if it was filmed in 2017, he would have been born in 2006, and likely be ~20 in 2026)
Immediate context: The adoptive parents (Jennifer and Paul McBride) tell him they are going to “separate” from him; the synopsis frames him as “the child too many” in a household where there are already two children and a pregnancy.
Placement history: The M6 synopsis states it would be the fourth time he had to leave a home.
Where this appears publicly (episode pages):
M6 episode page (synopsis includes names + situation): https://www.m6.fr/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enf-p_14939
INA catalog record (same episode reference): https://catalogue.ina.fr/doc/TV-RADIO/TV_6154396.001/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enfants?rang=229
Role: The adoptive parents shown on camera in the 2018 segment who initiate the adoption dissolution/rehoming event that anchors the story.
Why relevant: This is the “origin point” of the disruption, and it’s also the point where the broader concept (rehoming/dissolution) becomes real and trackable rather than theoretical.
What’s stated in public program synopses:
They are identified by name as Jennifer and Paul.
They are in North Carolina.
Jennifer is described as already mother of two children and pregnant at the time.
Their adoptive son Michael (11) is told they will separate from him.
Why they matter in the investigation thread (without editorializing):
They are the adults whose decision creates the “what happened next?” question that later explodes on French-language TikTok.
When researchers tried indirect outreach through the agency side, they declined to speak further (as relayed secondhand during the investigation).
Their case is repeatedly referenced in public discussion as an example of adoption dissolution/rehoming dynamics.
Where this appears publicly (episode pages):
M6 episode page: https://www.m6.fr/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enf-p_14939
INA catalog record: https://catalogue.ina.fr/doc/TV-RADIO/TV_6154396.001/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enfants?rang=229
M6 / Enquête Exclusive (French broadcaster / program)
Why relevant: origin broadcast and framing of the case.
https://www.m6.fr/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enf-p_14939
INA (French audiovisual archive record)
Why relevant: independent catalog record for the episode.
https://catalogue.ina.fr/doc/TV-RADIO/TV_6154396.001/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enfants
Caroline Amiard (director; documentary team contact)
Why relevant: direct, on-the-ground contact with the case during filming; provided context about what was seen at the time.
Public profile examples:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/caroline-amiard-76562a57
https://www.viadeo.com/p/0021ic8b2738jrel
Matchpoint TV Production (production entity credited on Matchpoint’s site pages)
Why relevant: production infrastructure tied to the documentary ecosystem.
https://www.matchpoint.be/press.php
https://www.matchpoint.be/catalogue.php
Michael Miraglia (Belgian journalist, RTL Belgium)
Why relevant: appears in related media ecosystem; included as part of the broader broadcast trail.
https://be.linkedin.com/in/michael-miraglia-5803a4159
Nightlight Christian Adoptions (adoption agency referenced in the research)
Why relevant: identified as connected to adoption services and dissolution-related programming; provided limited responses in outreach.
https://nightlight.org/
Renewed Hope (Nightlight’s adoption dissolution support framing)
Why relevant: official program language and how an agency explains dissolution support.
https://nightlight.org/renewed-hope/
AdoptionBridge (platform connected to “waiting children” access and adoption fundraising tools)
Why relevant: appears in the ecosystem of child profiles / adoptive family profiles.
https://adoptionbridge.org/
Wasatch International Adoptions (WIAA) / “2nd Chance Adoption” (historic reference)
Why relevant: part of the public conversation around dissolution/rehoming programs; WIAA indicates the Second Chance program has closed and refers to Nightlight’s Renewed Hope.
https://wiaa.org/
https://wiaa.org/2nd-chance-adoption/
https://wiaa.org/introduction-to-second-chance/
Laura Bauvais (Nightlight counselor; on-screen agency staff reference)
Why relevant: identified as directly involved in the documentary-era process.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/laura-bauvais-godwin-lpc-lcmhc-4745bb15
Daniel Nehrbass (Nightlight President; agency-level respondent in outreach)
Why relevant: provided direct replies about pseudonyms and limited case-level clarity.
https://nightlight.org/about-nightlight/our-team/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Nehrbass
Larry Jenkins (adoption attorney consulted)
Why relevant: explained the confidentiality barriers in practical terms (sealed records, agency confidentiality obligations).
(General reference point: public professional listings vary; this is included as a role reference more than a “go contact this person” item.)
Cyndi Peck (program coordinator referenced in outreach)
Why relevant: connected to the “Second Chance” conversation; clarified lack of access to parallel records.
Bernard de la Villardière
Who he is: French journalist and TV host, best known for M6’s investigative format Enquête exclusive.
Why he mattered to our research: He is directly tied to the documentary episode at the center of the Michael McBride story.
Contact points (public):
Ligne de Front (production company) email: contact@lignedefront.com
Ligne de Front legal page (shows email + phone): https://www.lignedefront.fr/copie-de-%C3%A0-propos
Réel Media legal page (shows email): https://www.reelmedia.fr/legal/mentions-legales
Réel Media contact page: https://www.reelmedia.fr/contact
Jérôme Jurion
Who he is: Producer/director tied to Matchpoint (Belgian production company credited on the project).
Why he mattered to our research: Matchpoint is connected to production credits and distribution context, so it was a logical place to ask confirmation questions about identities, naming, and what was publicly released.
Contact points (public):
Matchpoint contact email: info@matchpoint.be
Matchpoint website: https://matchpoint.be
Araz Gulekjian (also seen spelled “Gulakjian” in some references)
Who he is: Producer tied to Matchpoint.
Why he mattered to our research: Same reason as above, production-side confirmation and provenance questions.
Contact points (public):
Matchpoint contact email: info@matchpoint.be
Matchpoint website: https://matchpoint.be
Michaël Miraglia
Who he is: Belgian journalist and TV presenter associated with RTL (including Reporters).
Why he mattered to our research: RTL content and its echo on social platforms is part of the “how did this resurface” chain, and he is a plausible node in the media trail.
Contact points (public):
Email (listed on his public Facebook page): mmiraglia@rtl.be
Facebook page (About tab): https://www.facebook.com/MichaelMiraglia/about/
Caroline Amiard
Who she is: Journalist whose posts are part of the French-language amplification layer around the story.
Why she mattered to our research: Her content was relevant to tracing how the story re-circulated and what claims were being repeated.
Contact points (public):
Email (shared publicly on her X profile/post): caroline.amiard@gmail.com
X profile: https://x.com/caroline_amiard
Jenn Morson
Who she is: Investigative journalist (freelance).
Why she mattered to our research: We reached out because her reporting background aligned with the adoption-disruption and “rehoming” angle, and she was a credible person to sanity-check framing and terminology.
Contact points (public):
Email: jennmorson@gmail.com
Alternate email: jennmorson@protonmail.com
Substack “About” page with contact info: https://jennmorson.substack.com/about
X profile: https://x.com/jennmorson?lang=en
Megan Twohey
Who she is: Investigative reporter (best known for major investigative work, and earlier reporting that touched the broader “rehoming” phenomenon).
Why she mattered to our research: We contacted her because she is one of the few journalists strongly associated with earlier U.S.-side reporting on the underlying system-level issue that overlaps this case’s public conversation.
Contact points (public):
Speaking/booking contact (UTA, via She Said contact page): TeamSheSaid@unitedtalent.com
Contact page listing that email: https://www.shesaidthebook.com/contact
Speaker profile page: https://www.utaspeakers.com/speaker/megan-twohey
Writer, researcher, and the person who got accidentally drafted into French TikTok detective work via identity confusion.
France-based clinical psychologist; central research partner in sourcing documentary details, language context, and outreach to French media contacts.
Email, shared with Camille's permission: camillelauer@gmail.com
M6 program page (origin broadcast reference):
https://www.m6.fr/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enf-p_14939
INA catalog record (independent archive listing):
https://catalogue.ina.fr/doc/TV-RADIO/TV_6154396.001/adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enfants
Programme-TV listing (episode-level metadata reference):
https://www.programme-tv.net/programme/culture-infos/16114070-adoption-aux-usa-un-scandaleux-marche-aux-enfants/
IMDb series page (series-level reference for Enquête Exclusive):
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17271876/
RTL Belgium article discussing adoptive “rehoming” and public reaction:
https://www.rtl.be/actu/aux-etats-unis-des-parents-se-debarassent-de-leurs-enfants-adoptes-il-fallait/2018-05-25/article/112337
Nightlight Renewed Hope (program framing):
https://nightlight.org/renewed-hope/
WIAA 2nd Chance Adoption (program page):
https://wiaa.org/2nd-chance-adoption/
WIAA home page note about closing Second Chance and referring to Nightlight:
https://wiaa.org/
AdoptionBridge platform (connected ecosystem):
https://adoptionbridge.org/
People.com explainer referencing “2nd Chance” program in the broader adoption dissolution conversation:
https://people.com/parents/adoption-dissolution-explainer-myka-stauffer/
Reddit discussion thread (useful as public sentiment, not as verified fact):
https://www.reddit.com/r/Adoption/comments/x413k6/second_chance_adoption/
This page is designed for transparency and source-tracking, not doxxing. Adoption and foster-care outcomes are heavily protected for good reason. Our approach has been: document what is already public, link the public sources, and avoid publishing private identifying details about Michael beyond what public media already disclosed.