Journalism's core mission is to deliver plain facts clearly. Yet too often, euphemism and activist language replace straightforward reporting, forcing readers to decode what should be simple news. A recent child abduction case illustrates this problem vividly.
The FBI arrested a father for international parental kidnapping after he allegedly smuggled his 10-year-old son out of the United States to Cuba. But because the father identifies as transgender, both the New York Times and the Associated Press buried the criminal nature of the story under layers of gender-identity framing.
The Times headline read: “U.S. Sends Plane to Cuba to Get Child in Transgender Custody Case.” The AP chose: “Trump administration flies 10-year-old back from Cuba amid custody fight involving gender identity.” Neither is false, but both are masterpieces of evasion—turning a kidnapping into a politically charged custody dispute.
Here are the facts: A biological male, formerly known as Eri Ethington, fathered a son with his then-wife. After the child’s birth, Eri began living as “Rose” and identifying as transgender. Rose pushed hard for the boy to undergo transition surgery, according to family members. The mother opposed this, leading to a bitter divorce and a shared-custody agreement.
This year, Rose and his partner, Blue Inessa-Ethington (formerly Carly Ann Crosby), told the mother they were taking the boy on a camping trip to Canada. The trip was scheduled to end April 3, but the mother heard nothing after a March 28 phone call. When she tried to contact them, both phones were off. She contacted police. Instead of Canada, the group had fled to Havana.
Family members told investigators they feared the child might be in danger, citing concerns that Rose had manipulated the boy into denying his biological sex. One relative worried Rose might have fled to Cuba to subject the child to gender-reassignment surgery—something Rose had advocated for since the child was five. An FBI search of the home uncovered handwritten to-do lists including “learn Spanish” and “empty USU bank,” along with notes about withdrawing $10,000 in cash. Blue withdrew that amount on March 26. Investigators also found instructions from a therapist directing Rose to send $10,000 for “gender affirming medical care for children.”
On April 13, a Utah court granted the mother sole custody and ordered the boy returned. Cuban authorities found the group and turned them over to U.S. officials, who flew them back on a Boeing 757. Rose and Blue were arrested upon landing in Richmond, Virginia, and arraigned. The boy is safely with his mother; the criminal case is pending in federal court in Utah.
Despite this straightforward criminal allegation, major outlets framed the story as a gender-identity case, suggesting the Trump administration was cruelly blocking gender-affirming care. The Times wrote that the case “appeared to touch on a major policy issue for the Trump administration: cracking down and restricting transition surgeries for minors.” The AP dedicated its final four paragraphs to detailing administration efforts to cut off such care. Yet the gender-reassignment angle rests on a single line in the FBI affidavit—a theory from a worried family member. The media’s fixation on that detail, while downplaying the kidnapping, erodes public trust in coverage of sensitive issues.
This pattern isn’t new. As media spin on complex topics continues to obscure basic facts, readers must work harder to get the truth. In this case, the truth is simple: a father allegedly kidnapped his son and fled the country. That should be the story, not a platform for ideological narratives.
