Yes they do. Internet if full of it. Usual intention is to show it to friends and family. In 99.99% of case, no one outside of family cares at all. The photos of kids posted on public albums nobody cares about are massively outnumbering youtube starts earning money on making their kids into internet stars.

The issue is trying to ban an innocent thing - photo of a kid in state normally seen in public vs "making kids perform for camera, encourage them children to form participate in parasocial relationships with the audience".

No kid ever build parasocial relationship by having photo in family album, even if public. And photos of kids are as old as photography.

One could make regulations about monetization of such things I guess. Monetization does not just happens randomly. You have to enter into contract with social network to send you money, you fill taxes. That could be workable, theoretically.

If you post something on Facebook for "friends", and you have 5,000 friends, then is that really any different from posting publicly? And who counts as "extended family"? Like are third cousins in or out? And if you tag anyone in your post then it's also visible to all of their friends as well.

It's important to protect the private lives of our children. But it's very challenging to draw clear, enforceable lines in criminal laws and social media terms of service.