Through his attorney David Nied of the Astralegal group, Dr. Montoya provided the following statement to Health Rising regarding the events of the past week. Health Rising covered them in this recent post.
From David Nied:
Following is a statement from my client, Dr. Jose Montoya. This constitutes the entirety of his statement, and he is not available for interviews.
Statement of Jose G. Montoya, M.D.
June 5, 2019
I sincerely apologize to anyone who, in any way, I offended. What has unfolded since March has been a huge surprise and devastating to me and my family. It was even more shattering to learn, through the June 4 Stanford Daily article, that it was members of my Stanford ME/CFS team who experienced some of my behaviors as attempts at unsolicited sexual acts, harassment, and misconduct.
It is extremely important that you know I have not been involved in any sexual or romantic relationships with employees, trainees, colleagues, or CFS team members.
In addition to the ME/CFS team at Stanford, I have mentored, supported, and facilitated the professional growth of both female and male team members in numerous other Stanford communities and the Toxoplasmosis laboratory for almost three decades. I have done this with respect, professionalism, and the affection proper of my Hispanic heritage – without any other expectation than that of an advisor who is proud to see their mentees advance and succeed.
The social norms in the U.S. are evolving and quite different than those from my culture and homeland. I did not sufficiently appreciate that difference. It is my responsibility to change and be both mindful and respectful of the boundaries of personal space – and I pledge to do just that.
To my ME/CFS patients and their family members, mentees, colleagues, and friends, I’m sorry I have let you down.
Jose Montoya
Two days before in a joint statement reported by the Stanford Daily News a group of individuals stated
“This past March, a large group of women who have worked under Dr. Montoya came forward with extensive allegations of sexual misconduct, assault and harassment, The allegations included multiple instances of Dr. Montoya attempting unsolicited sexual acts with his female employees, among many other instances of harassment and misconduct, and were confirmed in an investigation.”
Yesterday the Stanford Daily News reported that Stanford Medicine spokesperson Stephanie Brusseze has not responded to questions regarding the fate of Dr. Montoya’s ME/CFS Initiative now that he is no longer Director. With regards to Dr. Montoya’s patients Brusseze reported to the Daily News
“Along with SHC’s organizational and physician leadership, we are working diligently to address the needs of our ME/CFS patients following Dr. Jose Montoya’s departure, We extend our sincere apologies for any disappointment or inconvenience [that patients] may have experienced due to these unforeseen circumstances.”
We don’t know for sure what happened in this case.
However, particularly when a group of women complain, the behavior tends to be pretty blatant.
Women (and a few men) have been dealing with this forever and we are sick to death of it.
It is bullying, pure and simple. It needs to stop.
There have been cases of overreach as is often the case when society tries to move forward.
This does not appear to be one of those cases.
Hopefully the ME/CFS community can weather this and move forward.
Due to his hispanic background he may have given somebody an unsolicited hug or the like, and thereby crossed somebody’s bounderies. If this is the case, he should be forgiven. However, we don’t know what has happened, but after reading his statement, I gravitate towards believing it is such a cultural based conflict. It is sad, since he is so devoted to me/cfs research. I hope this will be solved in a constructive manner.
He is a hugger! It is felt very warmly and sincerely in my experience
Exactly, you wrote my thinking !
The difference of culture is so important to understand in the interaction of coworker. I feel that there is a lack of dialogue. Please , we must give hope for the two parts to find , understand , keep respect and Apologize.
Hope for all , find the good way together for always !
I understand people’s disappointed with the news, but as a Mexican woman I struggle to see how a collegiate hug could be confused for “‘attempting unsolicited sexual acts with his female employees, among many other instances of harassment and misconduct” that are then confirmed by an investigation.
I’m a pretty affectionate Latin American woman who has lived in Mexico and the US and don’t think cultural differences can be used to justify abusive behavior. Consent (and an understanding power dynamics) matters everywhere. I’m sure we’ll here more about this investigation later, and I hope Dr. Montoya’s patients continue to have appropriate care.
I’m with you Anna Maria. ???
I’d like to know exactly what misconduct Dr Montoya has been accused of. I hope there is not a hidden agenda.
Multiple complaints appearing suddenly really comes as a surprise, or maybe not in today’s atmosphere. This is not what is expected to happen in such an intelligent community like Stanford’s, were inappropriate behavior would not have been missed for 30 years. Sounds truly suspicious, but this situation certainly deserves a most meticulous, law abiding, fair treatment and investigation. The stakes are high for those involved and justice, not opinion or personal interest, should prevail.
Dr. Montoya is certainly not apologizing for what he did, as he clearly states he was not involved in sexual misconduct. Rather, coming from a culture of respect and sensitivity to others, his statement should be simply be understood as his feeling sorry for the embarrassment and pain this situation may have caused them. To Dr. Montoya, I say we are very proud of you. You have not let us down.
To learn more about the support of those familiar with Dr. Montoya for 40 years, please follow this link to the Stanford Daily.
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2019/06/24/op-ed-letter-of-support-for-dr-jose-montoya/
HE HAS LET US DOWN.
William Bara-Jimenez your opinion doesn’t matter, the action has been taken, obviously it was worse enough for him to be fired which is NOT something that happens often. I don’t care that there were “Cultural norms” which were different, he worked in America for 30 years, he had enough time to learn, and even if he didn’t a crime is still a crime. It’s also a big insult to his own culture, suggesting these lovely people think it’s normal to abuse. I personally would hate to be treated by him and I am glad he is fired, there will be other researchers who don’t need to grope and assault.
there is no hidden agender. This man made it impossible for his colleges to work on this case, so they reported him. If they thought they could cover it up, they would have done – and probably have done for the last 30 years. Read up on Jimmy Savile, well known for abusing children and yet covered up by the BBC until a few years ago. The man also did a lot of charity work – still a paedophile.
It’s crazy I can go visit France on holiday, even though there’s a HUGE cultural difference and still I don’t rape anyone.
YES INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GULTY – THIS GUY HAS BEEN PROVEN GULTY THOUGH! The several claims were enough for the university to think of the welfare of it’s patients and practitioners, over one man’s desire to touch women without their consent. The investigations of CFS/ME will continue, except now it isn’t fronted by a sexual abuser, which is FANTASTIC NEWS.
and to the people asking for evidence, maybe consider how hard it is to get evidence for these cases, or how you are not people involved (eg you’re not the police, on the jury or on the Standford committee right?!) and therefore don’t have much opinion that means anything. There was clearly enough evidence to fire him.
I know him personally and not professionally. He has a serious problem. This is not a problem of heritage or culture. He has a mental defect. He is abusive and controlling to women. He explodes in fits of jealous rage. I am not surprised at all to see him come to this. I find it racist to assume that because he is Hispanic (and I am not) he can’t control his behavior or actions around and with women. There are plenty of examples of Hispanic men who do not abuse women or act inappropriately with them in private or at work. Just because someone has not acted that way to you personally does not mean they can not be an abuser to others. Just because someone has a brilliant mind for science does not mean he or she can not be a sexual deviant with serious mental problems. The women reporting this are heroes. They had to come forward and tell the truth to an establishment and society that mostly chooses to not believe abused women. I found his statement to be disgusting and typical of an abuser. Take no real responsibility and blame your heritage or anything else. What a tragic loss to the community of people he could have helped. What a pathetic end to his career. I hope he gets help. What makes me almost as disappointed is to read notes from women who “gravitate to believing” after not just one, but a large group of women reported his actions and behaviors as abusive and sexual. Are the women to stupid to know the difference between a hug and something sexual? That’s not a work behavior anyway. I doubt it. Wake up. Don’t minimize, excuse, justify, or accept this behavior. Again, I know him personally and totally understand how this happened.
Excuse me, but the real victim is my daughter who had to fight her insurance company for eight months (including 3 meetings with a judge) to get permission to set up an appointment, and that isn’t even until Oct. (over 18 mos after we first called) and probably won’t ever happen. Since we can’t know the whole story here, could we take a moment to think about the impact of this on all of the patients who are, once again, wondering where to go next and whether there is any hope in this long, miserable process of trying to get help?
My god – that is really rough. Just hang on, though. Dr. Bonilla is still there and Stanford does not want to lose the clinic. I actually think in the long run that there could be a silver lining. More on that later.
yes Dr Bonilla is still there but as a woman I find it insulting that he insists I bring my husband to talk for me because he is unable to listen to me. and it’s affected my care in a negative way. I don’t have this problem with any other doctor.
Whoa!
Never heard of that before. What the heck…
So easy to tender judgement. Are we not subject to that as CFS patients?
We do not know what the accusations are precisely. If they could stem from social cultural norms or not.
So I am not making any conclusions.
Mob mentality has caused great suffering for me at work. Trying to work for 25 years and support a family while cohesive groups of coworkers who have no idea of the burden I carry ever day have spiraled negative judgements triggered by the absences caused by the illness.
This had happened time and time me again. Usually led by two or r three highly vocal healthy people. Who in time cause a larger group to see things based on their biases. .
So I do not believe that a person is guilty just because of the number of people against her or him.
Have to know the actual facts. Which we di not.
The premise that justice is common place is of course belied by the sufferers of CFS.
I am also from another country Also hispanic, caring and affectionate. Also highly educated. The difference in cultural norms is huge.
What is polite in US can be rude and viceversa.
Bottom line. Can not conclude anything at this time. I do not have sufficient information.
A group of people who are very feministic could really get themselves worked up and over something like this, and dramatize a situation more than a single person actually. Any person when standing for a cause could misinterpret a situation and take things too far. I cant say he is innocent, as I don’t know what really happened. But I am not sure he is guilty. But in reality, I am a female that has been sexually harrassed by my boss at workplaces, and I did not go and file law suits. I got over it. It was wrong of him, but you know what? It was creepy, but I just brushed it off. It really did not hurt me that bad. The real victims here are still the patients. Unless he tried to rape or corner someone, or hurt someone he should have had a warning. I am not against feminism, but lets not take it too far. A firm warning would suffice.
Today it has become common to get rid of doctors with false accusations. Anonymous out the door easy as pie foregoing all due process and opportunity to be heard. Unless a multi- millionaire cannot fight back. This stinks to high heaven with a “group” of “anonymous” coming forward all at once after 30 years. Not believable one iota, also considering how common to treat MDs this way now especially when they step out of the box to help patients. DOD NIH another coverup of the CAUSE of CFS, like lyme.
Multiple complaints appearing suddenly really comes as a surprise, or maybe not in today’s atmosphere. This is not what is expected to happen in such an intelligent community like Stanford’s, were inappropriate behavior would not have been missed for 30 years. Sounds truly suspicious, but this situation certainly deserves a most meticulous, law abiding, fair treatment and investigation. The stakes are high for those involved and justice, not opinion or personal interest, should prevail.
Dr. Montoya is certainly not apologizing for what he did, as he clearly states he was not involved in sexual misconduct. Rather, coming from a culture of respect and sensitivity to others, his statement should be simply be understood as his feeling sorry for the embarrassment and pain this situation may have caused them. To Dr. Montoya, I say we are proud of you. You have not let us down.
To learn more about the support of those familiar to Dr. Montoya for 40 years, see my posting way below, or please follow this link to the Stanford Daily.
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2019/06/24/op-ed-letter-of-support-for-dr-jose-montoya/
I just don’t under America women. So you want a guy who makes inappropriate remarks to be not disciplined but fired while he is trying to find a cure for your disease?That makes no sense to me. He is from Spain.Inother countries women are not so stuck up and rigid. You can make a joke. You might even get a mild slap. And laughter in return.I doubt Montoya was raping or exposing his dick to these people. So u want him to go back to Spain? And what do these people benefit when he is fired.Total nonsense
He is Colombian.but yes I understand this point.
Accusations were made my coworkers as far as I know. I doubt anyone suffering from CFS will want to lose their only hope to be listened to and taken seriously. Ivebeen trying to go to this clinic for over a year. My insurance still not approve sending me to see other specialist in my network than are not doing anything for me honestly. I was excited to see DR Montoya
Maybe he’s innocent. By investigation, what exactly is the proof that he is guilty? We use to need hard evidence before destroying a mans life. I hope we don’t look back on these times and know that many of these mens lives were destroyed by a Salem witch hunt mentality. And please, don’t respond to what I’m saying by telling me I don’t know how it feels to be harassed sexually. I do. I lived through a situation where my boss was blatant in his sexual attempts. But that was in the early 70’s. My only recourse was to quit my job. So, yes, I do understand. But I hope Stanford had some hard evidence. We are awfully quick to decide that all the women everywhere who are accusing men of sexual harassment must be telling the truth.
Exactly.
Nothing needs to ve proven in the wit hhunr of #metoo. Allegations =guilt and destruction of reputation.
Funny how NONE of the Dr.’s paitents have ever complained? In fact they love him.
NewsFlash predators and sexual harrasment IS about power If he had this charactwr it would!! Hv showed up with his paitents. It’s about POWER
or so tge radical dems telk us.
Universities are being forced to bow to wolfpacks on Twitter.
Me sufferers are the REAL victims
This is what ought to be tge HEADLINE
I don’t think the fact that none of his patients have come forward means anything. I would imagine that if someone is going to engage in abusive behavior it’s far more likely going to be with an employee – someone they see every day – than a client or a patient.
It was both unnecessary and inappropriate of you to take this discussion to the realm of partisan politics. This is not the forum for that.
is this a joke?
It’s hard to take anyone who is illiterate seriously
Cort Johnson. I disagree. The very opposite. A practitioner would be MORE likely to choose a patient to groom or abuse, if done purposely.
Eg an M.E. patient, with brain fog, low in confidence, physically, emotionally, weak, looking up to someone stronger and with greater knowledge (a guru figure), less likely to question or know of the medical/academic protocol in going over boundaries in relationships.
I could no agree more. The real victims in this situation are Dr. Montoya and all ME patients like myself. I have been verbally (never sexually) mistreated and humiliated by MANY doctors before, however, that all changed when I saw Dr. Montoya and his assistant Amity. Dr. Montoya treated me with utmost respect, professionalism, and compassion. He is one of the few doctors who I truly respected me as a female patient who has this condition that is so often dismissed. He was also very affectionate without every stepping his boundaries. He gave me hugs, and truly made me feel like I was in the hands of someone who cared for me not just as a patient but as a human being. That compassion meant the world to me since other doctors treated me like garbage. Dr. Montoya, as well as his amazing assistant Amity Hall, will always be my heroes. I wouldn’t be walking today if it weren’t for them. I’d still be bedridden, unable to even pick up a fork.
Thanks for providing your experience of Dr. Montoya as a doctor. I know someone who feels his life was saved by Dr. Montoya and knows him only as very compassionate, caring and smart physician. He has nothing but good to say about him. Others have said similar things.
MEPedia also reports that Montoya won numerous teaching awards – so his students have thought very well of him as well.
However this all goes this, the compassionate doctor, the courageous advocate, the erstwhile supporter of ME/CFS, the excellent teacher – these are all important parts of Dr. Montoya that should not be forgotten.
IP Address: 75.155.221.124 & Jeanie Pochatko,
Thank you for being voices of logic and reason. These powerful, corrupt, institutional academic bodies are sinking up to their necks in the toxic #MeToo sludge, and it’s a crafty opportune move for the Global Government, Psych Lobby, Insurance Cartels, and Industrial Medical Complex to spin gold out of rot thereby prompting the ignorant masses of victimized fools to use the debacle as an opportunity to exercise hatred, gossip, and feed all their invalidated self-important inner demons, rather than engage their God-given critical thinking machinery.
Montoya doesn’t come from a culture being drowned & asphyxiated by hoards of self-centered disgruntled drones.
It seemed clear his references to his upbringing in a Hispanic culture caused him to fail to recognize or foresee that he, as an innocent man, might haplessly fall victim to the histrionics of the swelling snowflake culture and devolving political cesspool driven by the exploitation of #MeToo in a culture in rapid decline.
I read his prepared statement that he meant that the Latino culture he comes from is far less attached to the victocrat lifestyle. And therefore having come from a society of more resilient citizenry, he’s genuinely surprised to have found himself in the crosshairs of a uniquely ugly and despicable American crisis.
America is sinking in a toxic sludge of its own making, and he can leverage that in mounting his defense.
We’re a ship of fools, not only not making any progress, but actually – LITERALLY – handing them more power and control over us.
Jeanie Pochatko, that is an EXCELLENT, fair and well balanced reply. Too often these days we see the furore and frenzy whipped up by Social Media and the Internet, before the full facts are available. The Witch-Hunt mentality has caused untold misery for many, and to be accused does NOT necessarily mean Guilt ! Trial by Media is unfair & unjust – let the judges decide on factual evidence alone.
totally disagree Cort. Please use LOGIC. Any serious sexaul crimes are to do with POWER. In addition, it;s been 30 years with no issues. THIS is CLEARLY about the ‘new’ sick culture that has grew out of #Metoo. #Shameful and yr bias is noted!As it was in yr origional post!
I am worried that we just lost an ME hero to a movement that must be measured and applied with sanity. Cultural differences are important. When I was in college it was very easy to spot the Europeans vs Americans at parties; my best friend; Swedish, was always in our American spaces. It made me uncomfortable but only until I observed her with other friends. A hugger: hand holder: listening dynamicaly to every nuance. I hope we have not made a mistake with Dr. Montoya. An ME hero.
Innocent until proven guilty.
I’m a woman and I’m skeptical of all claims of sexual harassment until there’s rock solid evidence.
(Political comment deleted.) It’s only reasonable to throughly investigate these matters with the utmost of caution, not only for the alleged victims’ sake and safety, but also because they have serious repercussions for the accused.
Everyone deserves justice. Evidence, please.
thanks Bridget gor such a intelligent response. This victimology is a real neurosis. Evidence due process then IF guilty fire and sue him simple! others on this threas have forgot what thousands of heroic young soliders fought for on D -day
My God are you people insane? This predator has shown every indicator of guilt just by his statement. His culture? He’s sorry if his actions were misconstrued? Textbook response.
If you met Dr Montoya and he hugged you or was courteous and you base your defense of him on that you really have not been paying attention.
These comments alleging that the women made it up because of the MeToo movement, like they wanted to get on some bandwagon, are atrocious.
This is a tragedy for the ME/CFS community but it’s also tragic for his victims. Yes, his victims.
Good riddance to Dr Montoya. No good deeds make up for despicable behavior.
Leave politics out of this!!!!
Could we please leave Brett Kavanaugh, and politics, out of this? Of course, there needs to be rock solid evidence. I hope more information will be given to the ME/CFS community, because this is a huge blow to all of us.
I agree 1000%. The Kavanaugh hearings were a disgrace – clearly a strategic plan to annilihate Kavanaugh absent a shred of solid evidence. Women should not be believed in the face of a baseless claim because unfortunately there can be ulterior motives. False accusations only victimize real victims of sexual abuse and is a disgrace.
Bridget: yes. this. Great application of critical thinking skills.
(Political comment deleted. )
II definitely agree with you .
I agree as well. Because he was courteous to some doesn’t mean that he wasn’t sexually aggressive with someone else. Using Bret Kavanaugh as an example of why hearings are necessary to exonerate innocent men? Really? Bret kavanaugh is NOT an example of an innocent man being exonerated. If Montoya is apologizing for something that he did, what did he do? Is he saying that in his culture, it is customary to assault women? If this is what he is saying, and he has to say something in his defense, it would not be true. So what did he apologize for? Let him state what he did as well as his accuser.
Andrea, Kimberly, & Grace. Thank you. Until I got to your comments I thought my head would explode! Are these commenters living under a rock? Stanford would never fire someone, especially in this instance without investigation and just cause. As an RN and a pharm rep I suffered agregious sexual harassment. One famous “researcher went as far to say if I did t sleep w/him he could make the study he was doing for my company look bad! Immediately reported this to my employer, yet still had to call on this doctor. I could fill a book. Women victims have been doubted, ridiculed & blamed not only by her abuser, the court system & other women. It’s 2019 & finally women don’t have to suffer in silence anymore. Shame on you women making excuses for this man. There’s information out there. Look it up.
I agree completely. His dismissal was not based on a few comments but after a FULL investigation by Stanford. We can’t really think that they didn’t look at very compelling evidence. A hug doesn’t bring about a disnissal.
Agreed, Andrea, Kimberly, Grace. The idea that a man who was good to patients couldn’t possibly be sexually harassing anyone else is the most ridiculous logic I’ve ever heard. What do people think, that any man who does this must do it so every single person they interact with? If they were nice to you, that proves that they’re good? By that logic, anyone who committed any offense would have only to not to commit it to one person to be deemed innocent.
Andrea he did not take anyone. He made them uncomfortable. U believe that alone is enough to put a man who is trying to find a cure for your strange disease out of work? Are u people okay? Have you lost your mind? Seriously, let’s assume he used to comment on women’s outfits and hug them inappropriately. He shod be fired for that? How about a warning? Is he the devil? I mean u people are completely mad. Whomever the victims are, what would they benefit from his dismissal. Your utterances are shocking. Sexual harrasment is bad. But u can’t fire a man who is trying to save the lives of millions. If u needed treatment for a deadly disease and there was k ky one practitioner in your village who happened to behavior inappropriately at work, would u call for his dismissal and die. Are u crazy? Yes I know I have typos bt u don’t even deserve me to correct them. You are mad. U meetoorian witch.
“But I hope Stanford had some hard evidence.”
What surprises me is that it is Stanford that is taking action. Not the legal system, or eventually the psych system (for what it’s worth…). In the end, it seems to me that there is a category error.
I mean, even if he had committed some sexual harassment, he should have some sort of legal “retribution” of some sort. Fines. Prison eventually. But that’s no reason for destroying a man’s job, hurting a medical research unit and patients.
I mean, it’s not like he was faking cancer diagnoses to charge cancer patients for unneeded care…
Maybe I do not understand US cultural norms, but from what I read, I’m not a huge fan of them.
Actually this entire situation is drenched in – and driven by legal system. Every action taken is taken with that in mind.
Stanford is open to a lawsuit from Dr. Montoya’s accusers if they do not take the proper action
Stanford is open to a lawsuit from Dr. Montoya if they have not taken the proper action
Dr. Montoya has the option, after he reviews the evidence against him – which he surely has – of filing an unlawful termination lawsuit. That’s not an easy thing to do but it certainly is an option and if he won his case he would surely win major damages.
There’s no category error here in the U.S. or elsewhere. I don’t know where you’re from but I imagine there are very few. if any, countries where a company has to go to court to terminate someone’s employment! Can you imagine? If that was true no one – even those doing a terrible job – would ever get fired.
“Stanford is open to a lawsuit from Dr. Montoya’s accusers if they do not take the proper action. Stanford is open to a lawsuit from Dr. Montoya if they have not taken the proper action”
That’s precisely what I do not understand: Stanford has done nothing wrong to my knowledge. It should be an issue between Montoya and its accusers. Not with Stanford.
“There’s no category error here in the U.S. or elsewhere. I don’t know where you’re from but I imagine there are very few. if any, countries where a company has to go to court to terminate someone’s employment! Can you imagine? If that was true no one – even those doing a terrible job – would ever get fired.”
Well, in my country, universities are not “companies”. There’s a case in my country where an academic has been convicted of sexually harassing a subordinate. The courts admitted for the first time in these sort of cases that a covert audio recording was evidence that could be considered in court. (And the accuser needed that evidence…) The sanction was one year of suspension from his job as an academic (suspension means he gets his job back after a year…) and no fine nor financial compensation whatsoever (as far as I could gather the information about the case). And the convict has not had its name published in any media, but only his initials.
(To me that’s lenient, but that’s another topic.)
I speak Spanish and have worked with Latinos my entire professional life. When Dr. Montoya met with my son and I, I felt he had a natural intimacy that made the dreaded disease, ME/CFS, seem less overwhelming. He is a personable man and took an interest in our son, me and our family, which felt refreshing in this often-technical era we live in.
I sincerely hope these allegations are not serious and all returns to peace as we, care-takers and ill need people with Dr. Montoya’s intellect and passion now more than ever. We will suffer more otherwise.
Sincerely,
Boundary crossing is a serious issue. Finally it is being seriously addressed in our culture Being affectionate is one thing — if it is invited. Making assumptions that your affection will be welcome in the workplace is a pretty macho thing, IMHO. I would wonder whether he really had no hints from all those women that they weren’t as comfortable with his “Hispanic culture” as he assumed they would be. It also seems unusual in this Me Too culture that he wouldn’t realize that heightened sensitivity to workplace behavior is mandatory.
I am twice shocked. I have been Dr. Montoya’s patient for 9 years. By the time I managed (with much difficulty) to become his patient, I’d been through a series of supposedly competent doctors who insisted it was all in my head. They were not true scientists. True scientists do not “poo-poo” their patients; they ask questions. I was frightened about my illness by the time I finally saw Dr. Montoya, and I almost cried when he – actually _I_ hugged him – hugged me because I was so overcome with relief. He and his staff (and Amity later) were utterly genuine in their support. In many, especially warm-climate, cultures people are naturally affectionate, touchy, and “huggy.” Did I sexually assault Dr. Montoya by giving him a hug? Dr. Montoya comes from a culture in South America where hugs and touching are normal. I never saw nor heard of anything inappropriate. Of course, the allegations need to be taken very seriously. But how legitimate was their investigation? _Two_ individuals? Not legitimate. The investigation needs to be done by a large team of certainly well more than 2 individuals. Unless Stanford wants to be VERY legitimately accused of a shoddy, unscientific, possibly biased investigation, I urge them to reinvestigate with a substantially larger investigative team and to privately interview all of Dr. Montoya’s prior assistants to come up with concrete evidence of clear malevolence or violence. Dr. Montoya is shaken and will certainly never again touch his staff nor hug any patients again. Again, I very strongly urge Stanford to reconsider that they will be condemning some of Mr. Montoya’s patients to probable death.
Yes Louise: that is EXACTLY the Agenda. So far everything is turning up roses for those who diligently and endlessly toil to disappear us.
“The social norms in the U.S. are evolving and quite different than those from my culture and homeland.” Where is his homeland, and what are the social norms there?
His biography on MEPedia says his first college degree was from Colombia. Perhaps he was born there?
https://me-pedia.org/wiki/Jose_Montoya
I want to know the facts. I want to know who is accusing Montoya and exactly what they are accusing him of.
I thought the worst thing the Obama administration did was to make Universities responsible for disposition of contested generation interactions. The courts have procedures and laws to go by. I have called for large Universities like Harvard and Stanford to subsidize additional policing and courts in their districts rather than have amateurs in charge with mixed-up imperatives.
lol …hilarious post. To assert the wor[;ace HAS NOT changed since the 1990’s is inane.
The social norms there and most healthy emmotional countries are reasoable. What is going on here is a neurosis. Read Haidt and Davidson and Petterson all intellectuals who understand the tocixity of academia at present. In this case, it’s ME sufferers that are the real victims.
No transparency. Kanagerroo court. No due process. No obligationn for accussations to be challenged and cross examined …All unacceptable in a democracy
I want to point out that while the process is closed we don’t know how Stanford conducted its investigation. Dr. Montoya’s statement suggests, though, that he was not contacted during it and may not have even been aware it was occurring.
I don’t believe that it’s necessary that a company make someone aware of an ongoing investigation or give them the opportunity to face their accusers. The decision to fire someone is a company decision. It has to be done correctly; it cannot be done arbitrarily – but unless it is, it’s simply not a matter for the courts. That’s not how our system works.
I’m sure there many others who know more about this but that’s how I understand it.
If Dr. Montoya believes he was treated unfairly, he can, of course, fall back on the court.
“Employees who have been wrongfully terminated may be able to recover their job, back pay, compensatory damages, and other expenses in a successful lawsuit or wrongful termination settlement. Wrongful termination claims allege that an employee was fired in violation of an employment agreement or the law.
https://employment.findlaw.com/losing-a-job/wrongful-termination-settlements-what-can-i-expect.html“
IP address 75.155.221.124: Hear! Hear! Academia is a cesspool right now – sinking back into the toxic sludge from whence they came.
I’m Spanish (Europe), woman and have lived in the UK, USA, Australia and Panama.
Our “personal bubble” is much smaller than yours. When we gather for chatting we are placed closer to each other and use a more tender language. We touch each other on the hands, shoulders, maybe even a stroke on the head. We sit together in a train or bus, not leaving a space in the middle. Just details but for someone who needs a bigger space around him/herself makes it difficult.
This relaxed atmosphere is disappearing, though.
I’m a teacher and have observed that lately young people do not like this proximity. They, in Spain, are becoming too more “untouchable” and it’s hard to hold my hand and not touch them in the arm. And my male colleagues are having harder times.
When I was at high school lived for a year at the States. A short while after arriving back home a friend gave me a hugh and I cried, I realized that nobody had touched me (a hugh, a sweet word, a close look) for a year and it felt terrible.
I don’t know what happened in Stanford. But I perfectly understand those “social norms” that Dr. Montoya mentions. And I am not saying that we accept sexual harassment. But if I touch my colleague in the arm I am not telling him that I want sex with him, neither he would think so.
Difficult times for all of us
Per Wikipedia: “[Montoya] is originally from Cali, Colombia.”
And to affirm what several have said, no, Stanford would not take action this severe against a tenured professor without more than adequate evidence.
As of 1985, Stanford had only ever fired one tenured professor: in 1972 H. Bruce Franklin, who was a professor of English, was fired for “inciting anti-war protests” when a speech he gave on Feb. 10, 1971 at a rally protesting the U.S. invasion of Laos was followed by students occupying the Stanford computer center: more than 100 riot police were called to the scene. I’m amazed that I have been unable to find reference to any other tenured professors at Stanford who have been fired! If Montoya truly is the second tenured Stanford professor to be fired in 134 years, that is all the more damning.
How sad.
This seemed to me to be Dr. Montoya’s voice speaking. I’m sure it was very carefully scanned legally but it sounded like him speaking
The first thing I thought of when I grasped for answers was Dr. Montoya’s upbringing in the South America. Just a short glimpse of a Mexican TV show — at least the ones I’ve seen – was utterly eye-opening for me. It’s a very different culture.
Was Montoya caught in a clash of cultures as he suggests? Is he a more or less innocent victim of the changing times?
It should be noted that he has been in the U.S. for decades
I’ve been told that Stanford’s history in this area has been very poor. Could Stanford be using Montoya to show that it’s changed it’s behavior? Or is their harsh penalty just?
It should be noted that Stanford probably had a wide range of lesser penalties they could have levied: they could have asked Dr. Montoya to apologize, to undergo training, they could have docked his pay, censured him, suspended him or worked out a negotiated settlement. Instead they appear to have levied the harshest penalty possible on him – they terminated him.
That indicates that they considered that whatever happened was very serious.
So much is still so much in the air. As someone noted sexual assault can cover everything from touching another person to trying to force oneself on them.
Now that Dr. Montoya has made his statement it’s possible that if others involved in this disagree with his characterization they will come forward.
Your mssing the cruical point. his accusors DO NOT have to come forward. This is incompatable in a democracy. The right for an accused to face his or her accusors is an essential to a fair judical system. OTHERWISE it IS a #Witchhunt
His accusers have come forward – just not to us – they’ve come forward to the University and the University right now is saying trust us.
That is not the end of it, though – not in the U.S. Unless I’m wrong, Dr. Montoya has the ability to force his accusers and the University to face him in a open court. If he sues for wrongful termination everything, I assume, will made clear – what he was accused of doing, the evidence for it, etc.
Karen, the workplace is not a Democracy. There is no judicial system involved here. Montoya has been fired because people have complained about working with him. Stanford has conducted an investigation, the results of which they say support the complainants.
It’s also possible that intermediate steps were taken and but the behavior did not stop DESPITE those steps. I’ve heard that happen in other workplaces and it led to the final step, firing.
Thank you Cort for being the voice of reason, as you always are. This makes perfect sense to me. I mentioned in a comment above that I used to be an RN and later a pharmaceutical rep. I worked around many South American , Hispanic doctors who were respectful & professional. Hugging or touching is unprofessional in the workplace.In the early 90’s every hospital, every corporation had seminars educating what sexual harassment entails. “Culture” is no excuse. Also, many of the doctors who eventually were brought in by the administration- had been reported for years by various employees. These matters are not taken lightly by institutions. For someone to be fired, in his position, I feel the evidence must have been overwhelming. Thanks again Cort.
And thank you.
I would be interested in what the male researchers have to say. If it’s a ‘large group’ of women, surely the guys witnessed some of it. I’m not discounting the word of the women, but looking for clarity as to what exactly constitutes sexual harassment in this case. The man has dedicated much of his life to researching a treatment or cure for a disease affecting 80% women, and was one of the first to stand firmly behind all of us. Guilty or innocent, I hope he continues his work somewhere.
And did the women talk to Dr. Montoya about it before going to the administration? He seems to suggest he was blind-sided.
Judging from what Dr. Montoya stated it doesn’t appear so but I don’t think this is unusual for a couple of reasons. One – calling out one’s boss in a situation could put an employee at risk of being fired, getting a bad review, being passed over promotion or probably a number of other ways of getting “paid-back”. It’s exceeding dangerous.
Just think of what one bad review could do to your career? Or if a boss starts spreading rumors about you to his peers or your fellow employees?
Far better, probably, to go to an outside, hopefully objective party which is designed to deal with situations like this, document your complaints with them and see what happens.
I don’t think we can say there would necessarily be male witnesses. It brings up an interesting angle though.
If Dr. Montoya knew he was doing something wrong and that he was crossing a line – he would surely chose instances in which he and others were alone and no witnesses were available – to do them. If, on the other hand he acted without knowingly causing harm and without knowing that he was crossing a line – there would more likely to be witnesses.
Whether or not there are witnesses could reflect on this state of mind. Interesting!
I do not, of course, have any more information about particular case than anyone else. I only know what has been released publicly.
I will say, though, that the possibility that Dr. Montoya may be precisely telling the truth is consistent with the fears that I have had for quite a while with regard to where this so-called “movement” is taking us and what the consequences may turn out to be.
There are way too many tenets of this so-called “movement” that seem just plain outright dangerous to me.
And so it is my position that we as a society – and especially those of us who have had significant associations with universities – need to be looking much more closely at what is going on with this, and to consider whether adjustments need to be made in order to keep it from going totally out of control.
I also will say that I disagree with the position expressed by certain ME/CFS advocates that “this has nothing to do with us.”
It is not up to the ME/CFS community to determine guilt or innocence, of course.
Nor, of course, should be people who actually have done bad things in one area be forgiven because they have done good things in a different area.
However, in this case, I think that Dr. Montoya has done enough for the ME/CFS community that it is right for us to insist that he is given a fair shake by Stanford with regard to this issue.
Rather than people in this community just assuming that because Stanford made a decision, it must be the right one.
Because based on what I have heard about some of these other university #MeToo cases, I don’t think that we can make that assumption at all.
Lisa Petrison, Ph.D.
Well said! Agree
@Lisa Petrison Agreeing with you. I was a young ( attractive – I think) woman in science – starting in the 1960s. There were not many of us then, and I never had a problem. But my attitude and stance was clear – Hands off. This is not intended critisize any woman who has truly been harmed by sexual harassment. It sure happens, but I think we all would like to know, and deserve to know, exactly what happened with Dr. Montoya. I was hoping that the Stanford labs would find the key to unlocking this great mystery of ours. I have been sick 20 years – lost so much, as we all have.
Remembering the case of Dr. John Mack, professor at Harvard. He began researching and writing about patients who had claimed to have E.T. Contact. Initially he assumed they were ‘crazy,’ but after trying to help many of these patients, he began to believe that the phenomema were real. And patients were not lying or crazy. Well, he was called before a Harvard investigating committee – trying to fire him. Attorney Daniel Sheehan ‘saved’ him. Sheehan is a very respected attorney – having litigated Iran Contra, Karen Silkwood, Pentagon Papers, and more.
So, considering how the Powers that Be have ignored and maligned CFS patients in the past, I just begin to wonder a bit. Additionally, considering the extensive amount of research done in the U.S. in biological warfare, I also wonder if some genetically manipulated organism got lose decades ago, and it is a well kept secret. This acutually happened several years ago at Tulane. Unusual organism some how got out of lab containment and caused the death of several primates in kept in cages out of doors. So, … may we know the truth. Thanks Cort.
This speaks to me. My dad was exposed to awful things in Vietnam. He now has a very rare disease, Takyatsu Arteritis, and I have ME/CFS.
Just looking at the $&# of studies NIH puts towards MECFS is telling. Until COVID, then long COVID, it was mostly dismissed. When I got diagnosed with fibromyalgia I was given a treatment plan for CBT. Being a counselor myself I love CBT. But all it has done for me is keep me willing to live with a disease that took my identity, my career, my love of backpacking, skiing, cooking from me. It’s kept me at bay of suicide. NOT done anything for my physical disease. So I’m searching Dr. Montoya out based on personal referral, reading all of this negative stuff and hoping if he can help me, he’s not afraid to give me a hug because god damn I could use it from a doctor. My neurologist would hug me- she knew how bad my situation was and she gave a sh*t. She’s retired now.
Lisa, well said!
Agree. Thank you.
People actually believe he did nothing wrong? His STAFF accused him of sexual harassment. Stanford conducted an investigation and took action. People we respect and admire and who have done good things in this world are also capable of doing horribly wrong things.
Just because someone is charming to his patients doesn’t absolve him of behavior towards his female staff nor does it mean he isn’t capable of what he is accused of.
I don’t believe him. I believe the women. The social norms have been the same as always. You don’t sexually harass women. Pure and simple. It has nothing to do with ‘evolving social norms’.
I’m a male and frankly am sick and tired men who occupy a place of privilege in this culture continue to get away with sexually harassing women, treating them as less than, and then denying and or making up excuses.
Bringing Trump into this is beside the point nor is this a witch hunt. Stanford, who has a lot at stake in terms of their reputation would not have taken action had nothing been found.
thank you, especially coming from a man. think jfk and mlk jr. for successful powerful men who did a lot of damage to their wives and other women.
Well said and thank you.
Well said and thank you
I was assaulted at work and also at the university that I attended. The Montoya incident isn’t about the “me too” movement. It is about numerous women a claiming his sexual misconduct and stating what he did to them which hasn’t been disclosed to us. Good point, Cort, that if there were no witnesses, then Montoya would have known that what he was doing was wrong because if he hadn’t, he would have conducted himself similarly in groups. Still, people can think that all of these women are liars. After all of the incidences of sexual harassment that I experienced when I was young, I find it unlikely that if so many women came forward, they are lying. I would like to know what they said that he did and what he said that he did. So Montoya says that he never had affairs with co-workers? So what? What is he assuring us of?
Anonymous- Thank you for your opinion, it means so much. Well spoken & agree 100%. Nothing like victimizing the victim all over again which is why women keep quiet to begin with.
I don’t think anyone is saying here that he did nothing wrong. What some of us are saying is that the pendulum could swing awfully far in the other direction, as it usually does. Stanford may have felt it had to fire him for the simple fact that in this time we are in, to not do so, would have put them under a hell fire even if there was no hard evidence. It becomes very dangerous for all citizens to have instances where due process is not followed for the simple reason that people become afraid to say, “wait a minute.Lets be completely sure.”Cort, , you say he can appeal. Good luck with that. He knows what he would be facing even if he were completely innocent. We are living in an age where the minority rules. This doesn’t work in a democracy. Just because Stanford is Stanford, I don’t believe for a minute that they are immune to what has become demanded when women point a finger and make accusations. They are in lock step with this politically correct world . The only problem is, along with the guilty, innocent men will be persecuted. Who is standing up for them?
So because women came forward and Stanford found Montoya’s actions towards them worthy of his termination, you think that the pendulum will swing back to where innocent men will be prosecuted and their lives ruined? This makes no sense unless you believe that Montoya is innocent, even though he apologized and blamed his hispanic culture for his actions and never claimed that he was innocent. Women have a right to come forward if they have been assaulted. You do not even know what Montoya said that he did, nor do you know what a number of women all said that he did to them that Stanford took seriously and yet, instead fearing what the perpetrator will do again to women you fear the women and think that they are lying? Another man calls what happened to Montoya a witch hunt and believes him to be innocent, though he doesn’t know what he did to women that he is apologizing for? Hey women, don’t come forward if we love someone, even though we do not know what he has done to you. Innocent men will be persecuted because of you!
For me, hate isn’t a strong enough word to describe how I feel about a ME/CFS in my life. However, I have no desire to see progress towards a cure balanced on the backs of women being harassed and abused. Like all of us, good and bad can exist in the same person.My heart breaks for all of us who suffer from ME/CFS.
You are what is wrong. Sexual harrasment is not a horrible thing. It’s creepy. He is a jerk. He should be fin. He should be warned. Rape is horrible. Holding someone’s hands without permission is not horrible. Telling someone they look sexy in heels is not horrible. Stop it. American woman stay away from me. Amerjcam woman mama let me be. Get over yourselves. You are ridiculous in this country. A country where you can’t even go out and meet someone be in the grocery store cause no one talks to each other.
As I suspected, a feminist-fueled witch hunt of absurd proportions. In their hatred of men and improper understanding of the role they have played historically in their own oppression, women are now turning even completely innocent behaviors of men into “sexual harassment.” By this I don’t mean an ACTUAL sexually harassing behavior, but a normal, innocent human behavior that no one who hasn’t been brainwashed and indoctrinated with the feminist agenda would in any conceivable way perceive as “harassing.” For example, something akin to shaking hands, or patting someone on the back – things men would freely do with each other without being accused of “sexual harassment.” The minds of modern women have been warped and distorted to think they are all so irresistible to men that “sexual harassment” lurks behind every word, glance, and friendly collegial gesture. It’s beyond tragic the toll this is taking on men everywhere, and now we see it rearing its ugly head and having consequences in the ME/CFS community, destroying a good man who is doing good work. It’s disgusting and obscene.
To the men out there, I repeat from the comment section of the other article on this subject: do not, under any circumstances, meet with women in private, do not mentor women (as that usually entails one-on-one meetings), and do not hire women if you can help it (as women typically target their bosses, not their underlings, as their harassment claims are easier to make against a person who has “power” over them (the thought of which they can’t stand)). Follow what’s become known as the “Mike Pence” rule, and do not be alone with women in a work/public, etc. context under any circumstances. Always have a trusted male third party present as a witness. Take these simple precautions, or you very well may be the next unfortunate target we read about.
I know plenty of Colombia’s men who have managed to keep up with societal progress. Dr. Montoya is an intelligent man who has lived in the US for decades. He does not sound like a man who is taking any personal responsibility for his part. Yes, we very much need knowledgeable doctors and researchers, but not at the risk of some of our most vulnerable.
Rick, the Mike Pence rule is meant to keep him from temptation. It was never meant to protect him from accusations.
Barbara, you’re flat out wrong: “Vice President Mike Pence says that he avoids any appearance of impropriety by never dining or having drinks alone with a woman other than his wife.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerdooley/2019/04/17/biden-effect/#4e9ca07e3910
The Forbes writer goes on to note – correctly, I might add – that the rule is “an effective way to avoid both harassment and accusations of that behavior.”
So you suspected it was a witch hunt? A feminist plot against a good man? Please by all means share with us “women” what you base your witch hunt theory on. Obviously you have an inside source to claim such grandiose knowledge of what occurred. Something stronger and more compelling than written accusations by the victims and an investigation conducted.
It’s your duty to report all the important facts you have uncovered that exonerate the good doctor and lay waste to his victims allegations. Please share ASAP
And just an aside, it’s not okay to put your hands anywhere on a woman if it makes that woman uncomfortable. Even her backside.
And hey men, don’t mentor women you plan on touching in any inappropriate manner. I agree with Rick. It won’t end well.
Andrea, Your response to Rick made me smile (although I doubt you were trying to be funny). We needed someone like you to respond to the likes of Rick.
Yes Rick, please! Do let us know the facts you have uncovered. We are all waiting breathlessly.
In order to know that these were “completely innocent behaviors,” you must know all the details of the Stanford investigation, and their reasons for deciding that the accusations warranted dismissal. So tell us, what were the “completely innocent behaviors” in this case? And how do you know these details of the case, which have not been released? Thanks.
Yes, Rock, These are principles we’re going to have to become more stringent about and pay more heed to as the Tolerance For Me But Not For Thee mob become more and more unhinged.
Without revival, we’re all becoming victims of the mob outside Lot’s house.
Yes, “Rick” – not “Rock”
Just to say that this comment is fortunately far from the way that most men think.
From my experience in listening to my female friends, sexual harrassment is something they have had to put up with for years, and a pat on the back is not what they are talking about or taking offence to.
Having these concerns taken seriously in the current climate seems like exactly what should occur, pending a thorough investigation which looks at both sides.
In the case of Dr Montoya I do not know what occurred and cannot say if he is guilty or not. However, if multiple colleagues have alleged inappropriate behaviour then I think it would be very wrong to dismiss that as some kind of feminist plot. Many male bosses and co-workers manage to get through their working life without accusations.
That said, I also do not know what Stanford’s procedure for investigating these claims are, or whether they had reason to want to use them as a reason to get rid of Dr Montoya.
On balance of probability, I would guess that an elite academic institution would be pretty rigorous in this manner and resistant to removing a long-term member of staff based on hearsay.
But, I do not know for sure.
As others have said, it is very possible to be a great ally and asset to the ME community and bad judge of personal interactions. Joe Biden also used the ‘changing culture’ argument and it doesn’t wash with me there or in this situation.
Thank you, Cort, for a balanced account.
Not far from how a growing number of men think – the men who are able to think for themselves, at least, and are not still on the “plantation” of servitude to women and the gynocentric culture. You sound too far gone into the “white knight” mentality (coming to the “rescue” even here to reassure the scared womenfolk, lol) to be able to wake up, but stick around, it’s only going to get worse as the “me too” movement has opened a door for any behavior they want (or make up) to be assigned the label “harassment.” Maybe when you’re a target of one of these feminist-fueled witch hunts (or the family court system) you’ll realize what’s going on. I hope it won’t take something that extreme, but sometimes it does for heavily indoctrinated (i.e., blue pill) men.
Yeah, Andy and thanks. Changing culture. You just can’t grope women anymore and get away with it.
Rick you must be a member of the “He-Man Women Haters Club ” to express such venom towards females. One could interpret that you believe it’s acceptable to harass and assault and we should just shut up and take it. #ME TOO
Rick, Your comments more appropriately belong on a different website. I’m sure you can find more like-minded people elsewhere who will encourage you and this destructive form of thought.
Take those simple “precautions” and you WILL be guilty of sex discrimination in the workplace. Refusing to meet with women, mentor women, or to hire women, because they are women? Classic sex discrimination that will result in you and your company being on the losing end of a lawsuit.
Rick doesn’t know what he did and yet he is blaming the women, thinking that Montoya is an unfortunate target. Montoya apologized for something. What was it? He didn’t claim innocence nor did he say that the women were lying.. He just blamed his culture which doesn’t seem too different from the culture of Donald Trump who boasted about grabbing women by the pussy and saw nothing wrong with doing that.
I agree with everything you said Rick.
(Commented edited to remove aspersions cast against political groups_
Sorry this will be a bit scattered as I have severe brain fog & makes it hard to subject wise organize text. I am at the stage where I just have to write it as I think it and reverse scrolling neurologically plummets me into an abyss —-so please bear with it.
I am a woman, and I agree with your comments. I was in the workforce since the late 60’s till this illness ended my career in the early 2000’s. So a good 40 yrs of experience/observation. Thankfully my husband is retired & out of the workforce now. It’s unfortunate that 40 yrs of advancement for women in the workplace has been almost totally destroyed by #metoo. Today a woman can allege ecebts from 30 yrs ago and social engineering is conditioned us she must be believed because all women with a vagina must stick together, must vote for a vagina, & even wear it on our heads. The insanity is beyond comprehension. Within a decade the labor statistics for women in good jobs will be quite dismissal.
Sadly, the #metoo will boomerang & there will be future loss of career advancement for women. It will become critically necessary for men to protect their careers by not hiring women as they are a risk factor. Today they can wreck any 30 yr career in a heartbeat. I can honestly say if I was a man hiring today, I would not select a woman. Too risky. If you have to work with women make sure you are NEVER alone with her. Have witnesses at all times. If you have to be alone insist on audio recording meetings starting at hi and ending at goodbye. Even then women can say a man “looking” a way she was uncomfortable with. It’s sad it had come to this. I can’t tell you the number of women over my 40 yr career who flirted with men on the job and then when men responded the women made complaints trying to make it look like it was unwanted attention or they had t fine anything. We have all worked with women like that. That’s why I preferred to work with men. Men were much less BS on the job.
Anyway, I have been Dr Montoya’s patient since 2010—9 yrs. He has never been inappropriate with me…just the opposite, very loving & supportive, & much needed hugs when he could see I was literally at the end of my rope. His hugs kept me hopeful & helped me from doing anything drastic.
Sadly, maybe we ME/CFS patients may have in some way contributed to this(?) Dr Montoya worked there for 20 years without any issues. After taking us on, now this? Stanford may now say it’s their intent to keep the clinic open, but if they eventually close it then this was a setup move. When all of us we pleaded with him to take us on and start the clinic he started dealing regularly with a very emotionally abused, sometimes suicidal, patient population who had lost their jobs, lost homes, lost spouses, lost families….he was ALL many had & It broke his heart. I can’t tell you how many times my husband and I broke down in tears in his office and physically collapsed into a puddle in his arms, and he was in tears hugging & consoling both of us. I have never had a more compassionate loving dr. I think with him being from a more physically expressive culture it allowed him to reconnect with that part of himself, and be the loving dr we needed. I think we melted that typical dr medical wall that all of us experienced with the 30 drs we had seen before we got to him. When you go around hugging patients all day I could see that becoming giving staff hugs & in today’s climate not being understood. If it was only misunderstood hug complaints, but we don’t know if it exceeds that. Stanford is in an awkward position since Blakey-Ford is employed there and they promoted a huge support base for her which may have politically roped themselves in by their own actions. To not act after their staff spoke out so strenuously about BF could be used against them by these accusing employees.
We don’t know all of what happened, but it is extremely odd that this man reached a tenured career status without incident, and suddenly amidst the insanity of #metoo, there are complaints that rise to this level of action????
I know for a fact how hard Dr Montoya worked for us to MAKE Stanford acknowledge our illness. I can tell you that it was a huge battle for him as Stanford had declared for years they would not even accept ME/CFS patients!! I was referred to Stanford in the early 2000s and was told in writing from them they would not even give me an appt. I still have the fax exchanges with them denying me an appt because they don’t treat ME/CFS. In 2010 Dr Montoya was giving a talk at Stanford on ME/CFS. I was bedridden but my husband bought a wheelchair and put me in it in my pajamas and wheeled me into that talk with me slumped over and him holding my head upright with s neck collar brace to support my head up. We had a copy of Stanford’s denial fax from the 2000s & my hubby wheeled me up there to hand the papers to Dr Montoya. Right there DRM broke down in tears and apologized that Stanford did that to me & he told me he was t sure how to treat me yet but would accept me as his patient and to be part of the big study he was planning. It took a long to happen but it happened. But, it was because of his compassion for this group of very ill discarded & abused patients. As much as we all loved him we would be a perfect target group for a predator yet I have never had any patient tell me of a bad experience.
If Dr Montoya was a true sexual predator he would have targeted his patients who he knew no other professionals would ever believe us because he knew how other drs treated us & readily referred us for psych evals saying this illness was in our head——-only because they didn’t damn well know what it was.
If Dr M has indeed truly violated staff on the job then he should be proportionately dealt with. But, until patients start to say he was inappropriate with them, sorry but I personally won’t believe the allegations.
Not in a climate where young women today are socialized to believe it’s a personal violation offense if a man opens a store door for them …..or, if a man compliments a woman that she thinks he is lurching after her.
It is very strange times we live in today where women are Kardashian-conditioned to dress in body hugging spandex pants, huge butt & breast implants —-but then scream bloody murder if a man stares ….which could be just staring at the asinine absurdity of what women will do for attention. Women today go to work in clothes that 40 yrs ago was found only in Fredricks of Hollywood catalogues witch were intended for “ladies of the night” wear.
While many will think this is just old woman talk here, wait to see where this leads culturally in society. Look at where it already has lead.
As a FYI side note: I worked in a prosecutor’s office. I can tell you there will likely be fewer sexual abuse convictions down the road ….fewer women will be believed because of #metoo. I can share with you the results of our attorneys’ post trial jury polls. Immediately after trial our attorneys would diplomatically approach jurists for comments to help us better understand their views of our case strengths & weaknesses & their views of the victims & witnesses testimonies. It helped us in preparing our future cases jury voir dire questions. Our polls revealed the opposite of what we expected. We had thought it was best to select more female jurists. However, we learned through the polls that female jurists at that time were the most scrutinizing of other females behavior esp if had sons they were the least likely to vote guilty verdicts. In contrast, male jurists felt they best understood how other men think & act $ were the most likely to convict other men.
Ridiculous allegations today of male toxicity etc have lead to an outcome that is societally bad….women have now lost male support in more ways than one, strongly expressed through the emerging MGTOW movement of males. These socially engineered movements aren’t good for emotionally healthy families.
Sorry forthright length….don’t get to talk to people much these days do it avalanches out when I do.
You and rick are correct. Me too movement is a disaster for women in the long term as we won’t be included. As a professional woman worked in hospitals who has been sexually harassed, society is headed down a destructive path that will hurt women. Thanks for censoring me again but the allegations against dr m are not believable. We don’t even know any women made claims. Cort- you are wrong. Hospitals will run MDs out on false accusations and for no reason with no way (money) to defend themselves. Investigations are a joke witch hunt. “Anonymous group” all at once after 30 years. No way. Dr M had made enemies and discoveries and stepped out of the box to help patients. All very threatening.
This is an unfortunate event for many people surrounding Dr. Montoya.
I don’t have an opinion nor do I take sides.
I do understand that everyone involved, including Dr. Montoya and the family of Dr. Montoya, have experienced hurt due to this circumstance. Because of this, I wish everyone wellbeing and send prayers to everyone who has had a negative experience.
I wish for peace, healing and love for all involved.
Loving kindness and compassion to you as well, and to all beings! May we be safe, and happy, and healthy, and free!
I believe him, my own father was from a culture where it was the norm to open doors and put an arm on the small of the back or elbow of a woman. 25 years ago I explained it’s not appropriate and he learnt not to do it. He’s passed on now, but I’m sure the trendy #metoo vultures would have loved to have a go at him too.
What saddens me about #metoo is its a trendy witch-hunt, starting off as a minor complaint and then all of a sudden ‘student attention seekers’ (who spent a year in gender studies) ‘want to be offened’ They love it when a man is being targeted and exaggerate to destroy that man’s reputation.
Sadly I’m a victim of actual sexual assault and that #metoo trend is just that, a hyped up trend. These people arent respecting us the true victims. they think verbal innuendo is assault, and by doing that they are trivialising the actual sexual assaults that happened to people like me. True perpetrators need to be investigated. Older men with outdated belief systems need educated on the issue too. But witch-hunts and those making false or exaggerated allegations also need to be held legally accountable.
Let’s not forget the leader of #metoo movement was a sexual predator herself who paid hush money to her underage victim.
Asia Argento, #MeToo leader, paid sexual assault accuser –
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/entertainment/asia-argento-alleged-assault-settlement/index.html
Brilliant Roy! Amen. Except in this case it is the wellbeing of ME sufferes at stake. ANd, a real shame that a otherwise impressive website failed to point out any of the realities you have #bias #lackoffairreporting
Oh yes,we know how prevalent it is for women to harass and assault men….said no one.
“Oh yes,we know how prevalent it is for women to harass and assault men….said no one.”
Are you truly believing that? In this comment I explicitly and decidedly won’t comment on what Dr. Montaya has or has not done.
I recall quite a number of times women touched me inappropriately in unsolicited ways. Shy would be a better word to describe me then flirtatious. I’m prudent in my conduct towards women.
Still, some felt the need to lay their hands on my leg. When I was surprised by that, should I have beforehand have told them I do not appreciate that? Am I to blame for sitting next to them having a casual conversation? Am I to blame for not having walked away when some of them came and sat next to me? Blame the victim goes two ways.
When I was friendly to a female coworker that I had a drink with, she hugged me in a way that she almost hung around my neck. When she saw I wasn’t expecting it and moved myself away from her she released and only then let go. Yes, we had a friendly relationship before and probably both found each other attractive. But this was not what I wanted nor desired.
Was I to blame to be friends with here while never ever making any sexual suggestion? Was I responsible for not having made clear she had to to keep at least two feet away from me? Remember blame the victim goes two ways. It holds even for male victims. I appreciated she was ashamed and apologized later on though. Still, our friendship was no longer.
When having a dinner with coworkers, someones drunk wife came and sit clearly unsolicited on my lap. I wasn’t even talking or looking to her. She start to rub both her hands over my chest when I tried and puled her away.
I didn’t puled her so hard that she would have fallen and hit the ground. That prolonged the assault a few more seconds. She was drunk enough to not be able to land safely on the ground when I would have used all my strength at once.
Was that me inviting her to go on for a few more seconds while I more gently pushed here away and increased only gradually the strength of doing so? Was her being drunk an acceptable excuse to behave so?
Was it OK for her to do so because I was a men so “not a potential victim”? Was it normal for none of the other people around, both men and women and her own husband (who clearly was ashamed and uncertain what to do with the entire situation) to not clearly call her out for that. Yes all made *somewhat* clear this was not OK. But that was it.
When having a drink with a mixed male female group of coworkers a young female coworker out of nowhere said on the topic of having or not having children “I would like to have a child with you”.
Were I to take that as a complement that she trusted me for being a good father and man? Don’t make me laugh. That is nothing but a very clear and clearly unwanted solicitation for sex. How else would she have suggested having said child?
That is just part of the most blatant events. Events most of us would agree is undesired sexual behavior or at the very least crossing the borders. And I’ve seen it happen to plenty of men. In public! Yet there was not the same outcry as it there would have been if roles were reversed.
With that I wish to say a few things:
* Really, you believe women don’t behave unacceptable towards men? It seems we live in different worlds.
* With that I DON’T say the majority of women behaves in this way towards men, only that a really large percentage of men has received such undesired attention from a small percentage of women doing so often. Being a men does NOT make we like and desire their “affection”!
* Just as many men are victim of a small group of women’s behavior, the many women victims are victims of a small group of men behaving badly.
I didn’t report any of this behavior. Want to know why? Not because I liked it. Because I unfortunately know people who have undergone far far worse and are not believed when they reported the crimes committed against them. But beside if I would have done so as a man I would have been ridiculed and told to just grow a spine.
The most important thing here in my mind is:
We need badly to make clear distinctions in the amount of unacceptable behavior that is committed.
That is not in order to get perpetrators of the hook! It is in order to protect the rights of those most affected the most. Every time people when people put perpetrators of everything ranging from inappropriate potentially sexually tinted language to rape in the same bag, the rape victims lose credibility and a chance for true justice.
That does NOT make me say other offenses are OK or should not be reported!
I say make the procedure (the documents written how to handle such cases and how to make sure the process is conducted with good quality, not the details nor names in the individual case) for such cases as Montaya’s clear and available to the public.
Make it clear what “level” of severity goes by what sort of actions or their number of events. Make it clear what sanctions go with each severity and follow the procedure! Make it clear the procedure is followed by having a permanent contract with an outside specialized organization specialized in the matter at hand and that is itself held accountable by an external audit.
For crying out loud the man appears to not have had the chance to even state his views on the matter before he knew he was under investigation and fired. Serious? If so that can NOT be called a thorough investigation. Note that I don’t mention he has to know details of who accuses him of what.
For crying out loud the women affected do not receive the compassion and credit they are due because Stanford seems to chose to not have any trustworthy procedure in place. If legal crimes are committed Stanford denied them justice by not having an accountable and fair process and handing matters over to the police!
And know, it’s not because Stanford is renown that the process must have been fair for either victims or accused. One internal person who may or may not have ever handled such case before and may have or not have personal interests in influencing the case one way or the other and one external lawyer. The lawyer doesn’t make it a trustworthy process. We don’t know what he defends. My best guess is neither the interests of the women nor those of the accused but the best interests of Stanford.
As to having only a single internal person responsible for the case, did he or she even had a course or education on handling such cases? Did anyone consider that this persons view steer the case to a very large extend? Compare it with having 7 democrats versus 7 republicans in the supreme court: would you expect the same rulings?
Just as well, one university staff member handling (the procedure of) such severe case? I worked long enough in a university to have seen how harsh and competitive the environment can be. If they had a code of conduct for acceptable use of power in place and would retroactively fire people badly abusing their power repetitively (in any non-sexual way) then most institutions would crumble due to massive firing of people across their entire organization, losing key experience to run the place.
Again, this does not speak of the women being credible or Montaya innocent, just of the in my opinion total lack of responsibility of Stanford to handle the case to a single staff member. It may be sufficient enough to give the outside world the impression the case is handled professionally though so that may be what Stanford was most concerned about.
As to Dr. Montaya having the chance to go to court if he feels this is unjustified I refer to Cort’s add-on to the original blog:
“Brett Sokolow, executive director of the Association of Title IX Administrators, reported in Inside Hired that with regard to terminations that “some of the ‘really guilty ones,’ or those who are most privacy conscious, will not challenge their terminations”
Fine, so now we “know” he is likely either really guilty or really concerned about his privacy. That conclusion does not serve either the women nor the Dr.
Stanford, step up the game!
Good points. One person handling the case (plus an attorney) does not seem like much – I entirely agree.
I’m afraid I had to smile, though, DeJurgen at your stories. You appear to be, whether you want to be or not, something of a ‘chick magnet” 🙂
The critical aspect of those events, it seems to me, though, is that the individual quickly realized that their advances were not reciprocated and they stopped.
It’s a far different situation, when a person, particularly an employer, continues with advances like that when they are not reciprocated.
you got yr intelligent answer. Brilliant response by Dejurgen. What I expected from the origional post by this blog.
intelligent , thoughtful , looking at reality and fair! well done.
It’s extremely common. You just never hear about it because men haven’t started a movement of hate-driven hysteria in gender studies programs and demonized women who have done it, as women have done. They probably should, though, because women tend to be extremely entitled and are therefore typically more aggressive and even vicious when they engage in harassing and other similar behaviors against men.
Your absolute hatred of women is pathetic. I am a strong independent self employed woman. However when I was young I was harassed in different ways by men I worked with. Some would be abusive because they were threatened by me, others tried to use their power to try & seduce me into having sex, to get a job or tell me they “could make or break my career”. I am 67 and this has been happening for decades. So I guess you think Harvey Weinstein is innocent? Or that Matt Lauer, who locked women in his office in order to assault them, is a good guy? Most women are not taken seriously if they complain about being sexually assaulted. I was held up with a knife and sexually assaulted in Paris. The officer who took my report, had the nerve to ask if I could make him coffee. I hope you don’t have children, God forbid you do & one gets sexually assaulted or raped. If it was your daughter, you would probably ask her what she was wearing. The Me Too movement is not just related to women, it happens to men too. I have a friend whose son was sexually abused by a female boss. It traumatized him. He was working as a teenage actor & she threatened his career. I also know male photographers who were looking for work at Vogue Italia & we propositioned by the gay editor, that if they wanted to work they would have to have sex with him. This same editor never hired women. Me Too simply means ENOUGH of sexual harassment in the workplace. People in power should not be able to wield that power against their subordinates for sexual favors.
My daughter suffers from ME and is being treated by Dr Montoya. I have to pay out of pocket because he was fired from Stanford. There is so little hope for his patients, that I wish there could have been another solution other than to dismiss him. Especially since they don’t have another qualified replacement. I can’t say he’s guilty or innocent. He has not used his appellate powers to challenge his firing, which makes me suspicious. If he was truly innocent he would have fought for his job & his reputation, not leaving it up to speculation. Yet at the moment he is the only Dr offering hope to my bedridden daughter.
You sir need to get some serious help for your anger issues.
Some of these comments are ridiculous. NONE of us know what sort of information Stanford has. Yet we are going to assume that Dr. Montoya’s statement must be true (and thus the women’s statements WHATEVER THEY ARE SINCE WE DON’T KNOW are false) or that the university is jumping on the harassment bandwagon. Hey folks, we know nothing about the other side of this thing except for a small, general statement.
I also know academia well–and I’m not going to assume they didn’t give him a “fair shake.” I know that people sometimes get railroaded–but I also know that the power dynamics at many major universities can be seriously out of whack in regards to women. I am so sick and tired of the phrase witch hunt. UGH.
Hear, hear!!!
No attacks please. The #metoomedicine movement is going to dramatically change the face of medicine …from research to treatment and we will all benefit from it.
This post seems anti women to me.
Cort, maybe you need to start a women’s group. As you know The majority of folks with CFS are women; women have a harder time in general being believed. Women may do better on some treatments, and worse on others. We just don’t known as most of the long term medical studies were never separated by gender. Women are way more likely to have a cooccuring autoimmune disease.. The disease effects reproduction in some of our younger people.
The dose of almost any drug has been determined based on research on middle aged white men with male mice.
Women want to talk to each other. We have never had a voice in medicine or science, and we need to communicate with each other.
My mother had an auto immune disease and was treated just as badly as we have been.
So..
#metoomedicine
NOW this IS real SEXISM. delete this post! How did it get through. #Shameful sexist. 30 yr male suffering from ME. go start yr own women’s group insensitive #malehater
that’s the point the other side DOES NOT have to show there allegations its all done in shadows ..which is a loss of democracy and a VERY dangerous regressive road!
Why would anyone (even an attention seeking female student) make up allegations like this? Academia and science are hard enough for all students and especially women without someone having to accuse a professor and to take a stand like this.
Stanford is extremely careful about litigation, publicity and they are not known for getting rid of tenured faculty or taking it lightly.
I agree with Cort, it could be that Stanford has been lax regarding their response to women’s harassment in the past and hey could be overcompensating in a public way especially if they know it’s already inevitable and that Dr Montoya is guilty.
I have not decided whether he is guilty or not because I don’t have the facts. But after reading his apology I am more leaning toward him being guilty and am disappointed with his excuses and avoidance of responsibility. He’s been here what 30 years? I’m sorry I don’t buy that cultural thing. All men know when a woman does not want them touching her.
And to the two sad angry men using this tiny podium to voice their anti-female and ridiculous political agenda (the two men who can’t seem to spell yet have all the answers) shame on both of you. You are what is wrong with this world.
Just not true. There was an investigation. This means evidence was shared, (just not with YOU and why should it be?) He has access to a lawyer and recourse to the law if he thinks he’s been unfairly dismissed. This is democracy.
Yet the good Dr. has the right to challenge the decision through an appeal. Yet he failed to exercise this option. What does that tell you? Why is afraid to face his accusers?
Do we KNKW FOR SURE? I want to keep his brain power. We are sick. He is interested. Let him hire men. Hipjaven
Let’s please be reminded of the statement of the women: “This past March, a large group of women who have worked under Dr. Montoya came forward with extensive allegations of sexual misconduct, assault and harassment,” they wrote. “The allegations included multiple instances of Dr. Montoya attempting unsolicited sexual acts with his female employees, among many other instances of harassment and misconduct, and were confirmed in an investigation.”
Attempts at unsolicited sex acts by a supervisor with his employees is a very serious accusation.
You are quoting allegations that came from an edition of the student newspaper written by students.
So far I have not read such allegations in the statements put out by department. Upinger Singh’s email said, “I am not commenting further on this matter out of respect for the privacy of all individuals involved,”
Nor sciencemag.org which said, “It’s not known what conduct led to Stanford’s action.
As a matter of fact one of those articles said, “Both University and Stanford School of Medicine spokespeople did not provide comment beyond the information in the email.” (Which did not include those allegations, by the way.)
So who was it that felt so free as to give this information to these students since both the University and the School of Medicine spokespeople were not willing to do so out of respect for “the privacy of all individuals involved.”
Source information was not provided by the student publication. I think they practiced irresponsible journalism with their article. It seems gossipy to me. And I’m sorry we do live in a very gossipy society where people feed on the emotional adrenaline of situations without learning all the facts. When I see an article like that with so many hyperbolic words I immediately question the personal agendas of the authors and the sources.
Stanford cannot by law release ANY information regarding the case of his termination. As his employer they are restricted to saying he only worked there. I’m surprised that they even released the accusations & that he was suspended. If Dr. Montoya wants to read the accusations and face his accusers he can appeal Stanford’s decision.
I think there need to be charges made and then a trial. If he is found guilty fire him. If not, he should remain on the job.
exactly . SIMPLE it has worked great for many years. What is the other side afraid of having their allegations in the light of the public. He is a doctor in a important role. IT NEEDS to be public otherwise it is a #witchhunt
There is no need for it to be in public. And you know it might actually be better for HIM for it not to be in public? This way he can make a statement saying that it was just a cultural misinterpretation, and people can assume he was just a bit too ‘huggy’ and leave it at that. Whereas it might well be much more damaging for his reputation if evidence was actually shared.
Other side, witch hunt, women haters.
Dude I am a man, and Montoya was my doctor for some time, and he was down right unethical with me as well. Not sexually, but medically unethetical and he will not be missed by me.
What labels would you like to call me? Am I a “man hater” as well?
CA is a AT WILL State. An employer doesn’t have to have a reason to fire someone. Unless it’s a case of wrongful termination or discrimination. No one is guaranteed their job. If he broke the University’s rules, it’s their call to fire him. They have offered him a chance to appeal their decision. If he innocent he should have jumped on that. But he’s doing fine in his private practice. The patients are now forced to pay out of pocket. So the patients are the only ones paying the price at this point.
Several women came forward. Several. That is compelling. Also, Montoya was not summarily fired. There was an investigation into the allegations involving an attorney and a doctor from Stanford that lasted several weeks. I’m sure Stanford did not want to fire someone like Montoya. My sense is that the university was forced to fire Montoya based on the findings of the investigation. No, it’s not due process in a court of law. Montoya can sue for wrongful termination, etc. if he wants to. But for now, on the face of what we know, I believe the women who came forward.
Dr. Montoya has been attending American universities and working as a researcher and physician in the United States since 1987. One would think thirty-two years would be a sufficient amount of time to learn the social mores of a country, no? Unsolicited sexual acts and harassment of employees and team members is a far cry from “affection” no matter the country of one’s birthplace. Montoya was working HERE, not in Colombia for all these years.
He has not categorically denied any accusations of misconduct, but has instead declared that he’s never been in a sexual or romantic relationship with his employees and team members. Well, yeah, because it was inappropriate, unwelcome, unprofessional behavior and the employees quite rightly denied him and reported him. Notice he’s not refuting the accusations in this statement, he’s attempting to excuse his behavior.
I trust that Stanford would not take accusations lightly nor be less than thorough in their investigation. The institution would not be quick to fire someone who has been employed for so long unless the multiple accusations from multiple employees were found to be true.
Please let us stay united in fighting for research of MECFS.
Thank you.
I feel, as in any such controversy at this stage, we just don’t know enough to come to a conclusion. I think it’s probable that he harassed employees, but how can we really know and judge him without hearing all the facts?
I agree. We know allegations of sexual assault and harassment have made – we know that some of his employees were upset enough to bring the incidents to Stanford and we know that Stanford judged them quite harshly but we don’t know exactly what happened and a lot of different things could have happened.
Exactly. We don’t get to know much about the specifics, and we have no say in Stanford’s HR procedures anyway. However… the claim about cultural differences screams BS to me. I grew up in California and lived in Mexico for a while; it took me maybe a month to figure out the very different rules for personal space and contact. And I’m sure he’s at least as smart as I am.
I agree. Nor can we judge his accuser or accusers or make a claim that the Me too movement has gone too far.
True. All this speculating serves no-one. Not Montoya, not the women who came forward, …
Whether it’s a question of ‘too many friendly meant hugs’ or ‘really crossing physical boundaries w/ female staff’ needs to be determined in court.
And WE are not a court if law.
We are patients who are grieving the loss of an exceptionnal doctor & researcher.
This is neither a ‘witchhunt’ nor a thing that should or could be ignored by Stanford.
As for ‘proof’ … the proof will be in the consistancy of the accounts of the women coming forward. 1 woman ‘proving’ sth inappropiate happened is almost impossible as history tells us. They still get brushed off too often when they speak up (thinking of that top-viral hunter & his co-worker. Remember?). But a group of women w/ the same experience? Stanford can not afford to close its eyes to this.
I simply hope Montoya will go to court if he never meant to cause anyone harm.
Question will be: if it was a “culture thing” (hispanic people are warmer & upclose in contact) the male employees would have experienced the same behaviour. If not …
We as a community will have to move on in the meantime.
Another doctor is taking over i read.
It would be very refreshing if people could hold off on judgement until they have the facts. This is life. A man who held a position at a university and was a top researcher in his field was accused by members of his staff of sexual assault. The university investigated and decided to fire him even though they had other options and had to go through a long process due to him having tenure. So far, he has not appealed or challenged the decision legally although Stanford says he has the right to do so. Those are the facts as I understand them.
Those facts do not change the other fact that he was an excellent physician or researcher. Those things can also be true. They can co-exist with the other facts.
Unless Dr. Montoya decides to challenge his firing, we may never know any more than that. So far, he has not. Stanford released minimal information about the investigation but would have had to have released the full report to Dr. Montoya. He could release it if he chose to but he has not. We do know that he has made a blanket apology to anyone he may have offended, so somewhere he recognizes that he did something that was offensive. That comes from his own statement.
Life is messy. Heroes disappoint us. The CFS/ME community has few resources – why are we attacking our own community members on a forum that is supposed to be a safe space? Cort does a tremendous job bringing us the latest news and research – why are you attacking him? If you have constructive criticism as to the framing of the post, fine, but please, please, please stop acting like this is one of your Facebook pages. It is way too important to many of us for that.
No sally it shows CLASS and the powers against him. As a docotr with a family to be accused of this is as he said shocking. He is showing class apologizing because it is a grey area. AND he denie dthe major claim against him. AND offending someone is NOT a crime or neccessary wrong. Many great comics have offended people as others. Sadly, many nowadays are far too easily offended!
Sally, I agree that his statement is suspect. I’m sorry if I might have offended… my culture is different… Release the report, Dr. Montoya, if you patted someone on the back who was just a bitchy man-hating witch hunter.
thank you sally.
Agree w/your assessment. Also am grateful to Cort for sharing the report i a timely manner knowing that we are involved as those w/me/cfs/fm. For years, I have visited Cort’s sites for info, support and a sense of community in this often judgemental, cruel society towards those who are weaker due to disability and/or illness. Let’s be patient & hope for cont’d research by those dedicated to finding answers to many problems which have changed many lives.
@Sally Knight – Are you sure that there is a “report” that Dr. Montoya has seen (or that he has a copy)? In his statement he says “It was even more shattering to learn, through the June 4 Stanford Daily article, that it was members of my Stanford ME/CFS team who experienced some of my behaviors as attempts at unsolicited sexual acts, harassment, and misconduct. ”
I was once accused of sexually harassing a co-worker. I was placed on leave and told nothing. I was called before a board consisting of attorneys and HR personnel. I was repeatedly asked what I had done that would lead a co-worker to accuse me of harassment. I had absolutely no clue. I asked who had felt harassed? What was the nature of the complaint? When? Was there anything that they could tell me about the complaint? Could they help me to understand why someone had filed a complaint? NOTHING!
Six years later I was unexpectedly approached by a former co-worker (at a public event). She burst into tears and began to say how sorry she was, how embarrassed and ashamed she was. For the first few minutes I was just confused and then it dawned on me that she had filed the false complaint. I had been her direct supervisor. At the time of the accusation, I was clashing on a significant policy issue with my supervisor. With or without his knowledge, she had filed the complaint to curry favor with him as I was seen as a problem and she (or they) saw her accusation as his solution (I can’t imagine needing someone else’s approval that desperately).
I know that my experience was not typical and I’m not bringing it up to question all women (or all men) but it does happen and there are a lot of assumptions (such as everyone gets the details on accusations made against them) that simply aren’t true (I used to made a lot of those assumptions).
I don’t know what happened in Dr. Montoya’s case. I would ASSUME that if he challenged his firing, he’d likely get the details if he doesn’t already have them.
I do know how hard this type of situation can be for everyone (even patients who have had a range of experiences with every CFS doc-I’m not suggesting anything inappropriate, just we all have clicked or missed with a lot of doctors that others have experienced differently).
Whatever happened, my thoughts are with everyone at the Stanford CFS clinic, Dr. Montoya and the broader CFS community. Something went terribly wrong and it is going to take some time to understand, heal and grow.
If there is one thing that life has taught me, it is that being kind is almost always the best path to take, especially when being kind might not be easy.
I appreciate the discussion going on here, but I want to be totally selfish for a moment and ask about what will remain of ME/CFS research at Stanford. Was Montoya the only researcher working on this research or are there others there who will carry on? I had made arrangements to leave my body/brain to their body lab in order to further their research. If my donation will not be used to forward the study of this specific disease, I want to get busy quickly – while I still can – to find a university or other facility that can use my body for this specific research. I’ve reached out to the person who originally sent me paperwork to arrange the donation, but have not heard back. Anybody with any knowledge, please let me know!
Good question. He was working with other researchers. Montoya was not the “lead researcher”; instead he enrolled other researchers who used their expertise to carry out the studies; i.e. he got Zeineh the brain researcher to do the brain imaging studies; he got Mark Davis, the immunologist ,to do the cytokine study.
Montoya brought in the funding and provided the patients, while the others had the expertise so, if the funding is there and the patients are there – then if my assumptions are correct, Montoya does not appear to be essential to the current research going forward.
He does, however, appear to be essential to the ME/CFS center that he created and that the research is coming out of.
I don’t think Montoya was going to solve ME/CFS but his research was certainly contributing insights into it, and we would certainly want it to continue.
Read another doctor will replace him. But his brilliant mind, his contacts, his commitment to ME/CFS patients&research, … will be hard to replace i guess.
A true loss for our community. That’s for sure.
My main concern is that it will be political incorrect or assumed bad taste to refer to publications that carry his name.
That would not only throw out part of the sparse work done on ME, but would make referring to anything related to what he worked on difficult.
It would namely create a triple problem:
* Referring to publications he has his name on are avoided due to ethical views and risks to been viewed as being a researcher having low ethics.
* Using other publications, if they even exist in our field, is only scientifically acceptable if they are as strong as the original publication with his name on.
* If other publications do not exist, the first publication on comparable research MUST refer to his work. That is a clear rule in science. Before starting such research, researchers must hence decide if they are willing to refer to his work or not work on or publish on this topic.
This potential problem isn’t the same as having a scientist having committed science fraud. That nullifies the existing papers and hence eliminates the problem.
It likely has happened before that a researcher became persona non grata and was avoided to be referred to. But did it ever happened in a field that has too few basic papers to start with and where those papers may prove later on to be discussing key research laying the foundation of the field?
I sincerely hope the fallout to the ME community will be limited. But such is not a thing we can take for granted.
Of course it may be that Stanford has been dying to get rid of the ME center for a while, with top Federal officials perhaps nudging them along. A complaint or two agains Montoya has given them leeway to do so. —
Precisely. My pt from the start. This IS the most LIKELY secenario
Hmm…interesting thought.
The first #Meeeeeeetoo Witch-hunt was started by a predator… after she herself paid hush money to her underage victim!!
They do make up lies and here’s proof
Asia Argento, #MeToo leader, paid sexual assault accuser –
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/entertainment/asia-argento-alleged-assault-settlement/index.html
“Social norms in the U.S. are evolving…” Almost every apology published by a noted person who has been accused of sexual harassment/assault contains some version of this “changing times” false excuse. The proof that harassment/assault has been prohibited by our ethical norms for generations is that these perpetrators always abuse women only when they have an expectation of secrecy. The only thing that has changed with the times is that women are now speaking out publicly against their abusers. As for his “cultural” excuse, a man smart enough to do research at Stanford is smart enough to figure out the rules of the culture he’s living in. These pathetic excuses only serve to make him appear more guilty….and more arrogant.
I agree with Roy, let’s not forget innocent men are often charged and discredited by the mob until they have ABSOLUTE PROOF they are INNOCENT…. this policeman was very lucky to have a bodycamera on as he was suspended until it was viewed to reveal she lied. Until then he was the victim of a witch-hunt
Video: Bodycam footage shows woman falsely accused cop of sexual assault | New York Post
https://nypost.com/video/bodycam-footage-shows-woman-falsely-accused-cop-of-sexual-assault/
Dr. M,
Of course, I do not know the nature of the details. However, the first thing I thought about when I heard of this unfortunate news was the possibility of cultural differences playing a huge role.
I also thought that for many years, you have cared for a very sick and under validated population with sensitivity, concern and empathy. Perhaps, in addition to the cultural differences this hypersensitive kindness and comfort you so generously give your patients has naturally spilled over to those around you.
In many cases, harassment is just that. However, harassment can sometimes simply be a mere difference in perception. Either way, I hope that things are cleared up and eventually there is peace for you and for those involved.
Stress makes us sicker. I don’t feel it’s worth the cortisol burst.
Thanks for the heads up, Cort.
In my opinion the Stanford CFS clinic was a bit like Oz. Once you got there, you realized it was pretty much a myth.
We do not have enough information to know what really happened at this point. So much of what we are writing is supposition. Maybe we never will know if Dr. Montoya’s accusers never have to tell their stories openly and Dr. Montoya never has the chance to refute them. Nor do we know what political maneuvers may be going on in the background at Stanford. We say alternatively that Stanford wouldn’t want to lose Dr. Montoya and that Stanford might want to recapture the funding going to the ME/CFS clinic. We really don’t know. It is all speculation because we have no real details about the accusers who remain anonymous, their numbers, the specific accusations they’ve made or anything else. Nor do we know what Stanford’s motivations might be here. The report made by the Stanford doctor and outside counsel has not been made public either. So as I see it we are in the dark and for now I think Dr. Montoya deserves the protection of being innocent until proven guilty.
Sockpuppet Alert
Someone requested that I look at the IP addresses associated with the comments because some of the commenters seemed to be posting similar posts.
That person was right. It turns out that over the past two days Frank, Jeff, Bill, Karen, Bob and Li have been using different emails and different identities to post from the same IP address; i.e. it appears that one person is taking different names to make their point. This is fundamentally unfair because it makes it appear that more people share their views than really are.
15 posts have come from that IP address over the past two days. Yesterday was the first time anyone from that IP address has ever commented on Health Rising.
Because it’s impossible to know the proper name of the person the name on their comments has been changed to “From IP address 75.155.221.124”
Whoever you are – you’ve made your point. Posts from that IP address will no longer be allowed.
That makes sense. I was finding it hard to believe that our community was that backwards. Thank you. I just left a post while you were posting this, but I’m done posting now.
I was just thinking there are many repetitive comments here. This arguing within our community about something we don’t have any facts about is a waste of precious energy resources and can’t possibly be any good for the health of those involved. I’m happy you have caught out Jeff-Bill-Karen-Bob-Li and I’m glad you have stopped their posts.
Just a thought, would it be best to close comments when people start arguing on contentious topics under your articles Cort? I know many support groups do this for the sake of the community’s health. Especially if the argument’s just going around in negative circles.
Oh that’s good to know. Cort please can you delete this person’s comments because a lot of people are going to waste energy replying before they get to this post. Thanks.
Thanks for uncovering this Cort. And also to the person who brought it to your attention. I was beginning to think that we live in very regressive times.
It’s time to grow up. Many people’s heroes have failed to live up to their image. Bill Cosby? He’s in jail now, decades after his first rape. Will an innocent person be swept up in #metoo? Of course. Innocent people get accused and even executed. Not to minimize that. However the huge majority of people accused of sexual harassment and even assault in Montoya’s case have been found to be rightly accused.
I’m more concerned about the female half of the workplace that is shut down, unjustly not promoted, fired or caused to quit by a power hungry, entitled boss. This causes society and most likely this clinic to be that much poorer in talent and further behind in results than we might be. Of course not to mention the harm caused to the accusers.
So I’m much less concerned with the infinitesimal possibility that somewhere, some guy has been targeted by, say 8 women who are just mean and bitchy and want to ruin some great guy’s career by accusing him of sexual harassment when all he did was pat them familiarly on the back.
This is about power differentials, something Dr. Bonilla may not fully appreciate. When I see comment by women that he’s a ‘hugger’ and is sincere, I cringe. Why would he put himself in any situation that could be misinterpreted? Do his male cohorts and patients receive similar expressions of affection? It doesn’t matter what his culture is or even his perceptions. It’s how certain behaviors are perceived. I hope the truth is that he simply failed to appreciate the power differential, as is often the case. I’m encouraged that he expresses a willingness to learn. But his statement troubles me on some levels.
There are rules and norms in place, not to prevent human contact, but to ensure that contact is between peers and agreeable to both. I can’t imagine having a doctor that initiates physical contact with me other than examination requirements. Not without my permission. This isn’t the Me Too movement’s fault. It’s a lack of respect or appreciation for others’ boundaries and conditions that may create duress for them due to all kinds of factors. I used to work with abused children. I wanted to hug them so much. But I couldn’t. And it would not have been right to do so. That was my need, not theirs. I couldn’t risk that child being further traumatized by unwanted affection from another adult, a truly massive power differential. And this is where Dr. Montoya may have stumbled: meeting his needs rather than respecting the personal space and boundaries of others. And forgetting the inherent conditions of power differentials between those in charge and employees under them. And patients, who are the truly vulnerable.
I hope he does get the help and education he needs. His work has been extremely valuable to our community. If it turns out the offenses are truly awful, he will need to make huge changes to earn out trust again.
Vicki P, What has Dr. Bonilla go to do with this at all?
Dr Ron Davis works at Stanford also. I don’t understand how it works, is his division
Separate from dr Montoya?
Ron Davis is entirely separate from Dr. Montoya. There is no overlap at all.
I believe that this conversation should end. This is not ME related. This is upsetting.
To add a perspective: in California, if I touch a person without their permission, I can be charged with assault. When I responded to medical emergencies as an EMT and a member of an ambulance crew, if I rested my hand on an conscious patient as I asked, “May I take your pulse?”, I could be charged with assault, because I had not received the patient’s permission to touch them first. Of course, I have no idea if this is relevant, but I think it is important information for the community to have.
I think that anyone who takes even a cursory look at the history of ME/CFS likely will become quickly disabused of any illusions that they might have had that people in positions of authority never make mistakes.
If organizations such as the CDC, NIH, Mayo Clinic, etc. could have been so wrong about this disease for such a long period of time, then I don’t think that anyone should be assuming that there is no way that Stanford may have been wrong in its judgments about this case.
LIsa Petrison, Ph.D.
Good detective work, Cort. Thanks for letting us know about Dr. Montoya and about how easy it is for us to be duped into thinking one person is many people. Sick!
I don’t know the specifics of this case but as someone who is an immigrant to the US from a non-European country, I don’t think it is fair of Dr. Montoya to blame his behavior on his background. I have many friends and relatives who immigrated here. Some immigrated in their teens, 20s, 30s, 40s, etc. and have lived here from a few years to a few decades. They’re from Europe, Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, and yes South America. The great majority of them “live and learn”: they know they have to modify some of their speech, habits, etc. to fit into US society, esp. in the workforce. Maybe a few gaffes are made here and there initially but I have never heard of a friend or relative being fired or terminated because of cultural differences.
Also, I would add most large organizations, including universities, do not fire people for a first or a minor gaffe (e.g. asking a subordinate out on a date, telling an awkward joke once or twice). And punishments aren’t all or nothing. Usually, unless the behavior is initially egregious (e.g. rape), it is likely that there are several steps (e.g. warning letter, mandatory sex harassment classes, etc.) between doing nothing and termination. Large companies also are very keen about educating their staff: for one company I worked for, their orientation process included a short session on sexual harassment, whom to report it to, what to note when reporting, etc.
I wish folks would keep in mind that an employer is not a criminal court. Harassment or abuse are not criminal offenses. You can be justifiably fired for them, but you won’t go to jail.
“Sexual assault”, on the other hand, is a crime. It’s generally considered in criminal law to be unwanted touching of sexually-sensitive areas: breasts, buttocks, and genitals. It’s not hugs or pats on the back or an arm around the shoulders. It’s not verbally soliciting sex. If Dr. M. is in fact accused of sexual assault, not just abuse, the appropriate agency to deal with that is the criminal justice system, and Stanford needs to turn over its findings to the police. Apparently they have not done so.
Since we don’t know the specifics of the allegations, I suggest that unless he’s charged with the crime of “assault”, we should all stop using the term to refer to his actions.
All Healthcare professionals are required to take courses in professional ethics and sign on to codes of conduct. I am one of them.
The lessons in these courses include the topics of power dynamics and how touching any sort can shift the balance and do harm.
Cultural heritage is not a valid reason for bypassing these professional standards.
These codes of conduct are in place because, sadly, the reality is that they are needed.
It is not just uncomfortable to experience touching or suggestive behavior; there are rules in place. You do have recourse to report violations and protect your integrity, and we all have the right to a safe workplace and Healthcare experience.
That IP Address is in Surrey, BC, Canada
Long:-122.824000 Lat:49.104900
Shall we send the CMP’s ?
What sad news. I’ve read half the comments, which seem to be split. One thing comes to mind – was Dr Montoya warned that his behaviour was unwelcome? His surprise in his statement suggests that maybe he wasn’t aware. If the disgruntled group all got together & took this away & reported it, without even suggesting to him that he should change his hugging (or whatever) behaviour. it seems a bit harsh – sealing his fate (and great loss to the ME/CFS world of research), without any chance for redress by him whatsoever?
I know nothing else so of course Stanford could have taken the only option they had. But for a highly regarded researcher to lose his entire career “just like that”, seems a bit much. Just my thoughts.
‘We know allegations of sexual assault and harassment have been made – we know that some of his employees were upset enough to bring the incidents to Stanford and we know that Stanford judged them quite harshly but we don’t know exactly what happened and a lot of different things could have happened.’ A post from Cort summing up the facts that was very helpful and balanced, except perhaps in the conclusion that ‘Stanford judged them quite harshly’. Wouldn’t you need to know the nature and frequency of events before concluding the judgement was ‘harsh’? I am surprised that as the the complaints were considered serious enough to result in termination of contract they weren’t referred for police investigation. It’s the lack of transparent information that leads to speculation and ill informed conclusions and promotes a ‘witchhunt’ mentality. I’m now making the assumption that the events were unwitnessed, so presumably there isn’t proof only the balance of probability based on the nature of the complaints. In my own experience it’s a great challenge to find and stick to facts in these situations when it stirs up a storm of reactions and opinions. I feel for everyone involved and hope justice was done and there is some closure.
I concluded that Stanford must have judged them harshly because they levied the harshest possible penalty.
Would you by any chance mean:
“concluded that Stanford must have judged them *to be harsh*”?
That holds a totally different meaning then what you wrote. Having ME makes expressing our thoughts more difficult then it used to be…
Sorry, Stanford judged Dr. Montoya’s alleged actions to be harsh enough (I should have used “egregious enough) to warrant a very harsh penalty; i.e. termination
I would just like to point out that as Dr Montoya has been in the US for decades now he understands North American socials norms perfectly well. Additionally, it is insulting to Colombian culture for him to suggest an MD in, say, Bogota would be well within bounds treating his staff in such a manner as did Dr. Montoya. Dr Montoya’s statement does nothing to advance his innocence. Clearly, by his own words, the man participated in repeated behaviors that were grossly inappropriate.
Clearly the ever-increasingly toxic #MeToo movement – along with the Western Civilization-killing identity politics sludge & politically correct sewage that is polluting our society – are very powerful and useful weapons for the Utopian SJW Death Cult; like a plague of locusts, they’ll consume everything in their path, then turn on themselves.
It’ll be just one more unpunished crime against humankind if the bloodthirsty exploiting tolerance witch hunting mob outside of Lot’s house successfully target & contribute to destabilizing and/or neutralizing this man who has thus far, based on the facts, received no discernable substantive measures of justice.
I pray for Dr. Montoya and his family as they are dragged into the public square for judgment & scourging by a mindless hate-fueled mob.
I want to point out the gaping disconnect between Dr. Montoya’s statement and that which the Daily News printed which came from individuals involved in the investigation.
Dr. Montoya stated:
“I have mentored, supported, and facilitated the professional growth of both female and male team members in numerous other Stanford communities and the Toxoplasmosis laboratory for almost three decades. I have done this with respect, professionalism, and the affection proper of my Hispanic heritage ”
Individuals involved in the investigation stated:
“This past March, a large group of women who have worked under Dr. Montoya came forward with extensive allegations of sexual misconduct, assault and harassment, The allegations included multiple instances of Dr. Montoya attempting unsolicited sexual acts with his female employees, among many other instances of harassment and misconduct, and were confirmed in an investigation.”
I don’t see any way to resolve these two statements other than to conclude that one of them is not telling the truth.
>I don’t see any way to resolve these two statements other than to conclude that one of them is not telling the truth.
I think that the reason that you don’t see a way to resolve these two statements is that you have not yet become familiar with enough of these university cases to understand what may be going on here.
As I mentioned in a comment yesterday, the meanings of some of these terms (e.g. “sexual misconduct,” “assault,” “harassment” and “attempting unsolicited sexual acts”) have been at many universities broadened to the point that behaviors that very well may be considered perfectly acceptable in some cultures (such as hugging, casual flirting or even just standing very close to someone) may now be categorized in the same way as actual criminal behaviors when it comes to making judgments about wrongdoing.
The part of the situation here that concerns me the most, though, is that Dr. Montoya claims that he did not know that the accusations came from people on the ME/CFS team until he read about it in the Stanford newspaper three days ago.
How can anyone possibly mount an effective defense of their own actions if they don’t even know who their accusers might be?
But that sounds typical of how universities are handling these cases too. It’s really turned into a nightmare.
And so in general, I think we need to be leaving room for the possibility that the accusations against Dr. Montoya may be for a series of trivial inadvertent offenses that are being treated by the university as if they were really serious crimes, and also that Dr. Montoya never has been given an opportunity to mount an adequate defense on his own behalf.
And therefore, that neither party has to be purposely lying for the situation to have gotten to what we are seeing here.
“How can anyone possibly mount an effective defense of their own actions if they don’t even know who their accusers might be?”
Exactly. And when was he made aware that that accusations exited? Was he part of investigatory process at all?
This is concerning because no innocent person under such circumstances would ever be able to exonerate himself. He may win a civil suit, but only after irreparable damage was done to his reputation.
To be clear, I personally think it’s very unlikely that Montoya is innocent of behavior that is, at the very least, inappropriate. I do take your point, Lisa, about broadening of concepts. But I still find it hard to believe that they would throw out “assault” without solid evidence of obvious attempts at overtly sexual physical contact. I don’t know, maybe I’m being naive.
I just hope that we, as a society, can figure out how to be mindful of historic wrongs (sexist incredulity toward female accusers) without sacrificing due process. Because basic social and legal fairness depend on it.
I am insufficiently aware of USA law, but in at least most European countries, if Stanford was aware of Montaya committing assault as a crime in a legal sense then the people in charge would open themselves up to being held personally accountable for not reporting a case of suspect sexual crimes to the police.
We however do not know if such did or did not happen at this time.
It does seem odd that Dr. Montoya was not given the opportunity to address the situation before being fired. I think we would all expect, if we were in that situation to at least being given the chance to talk over what was happening.
It could also indicate an investigation which found such egregious acts that whoever dealt with this – I assume it was a board of some sort – felt there was no room for compromise – no act that Dr. Montoya could take to remedy the situation: there was nothing to do but remove him.
Unfortunately, it’s all speculation!
Of course, it must be acknowledged that we are in a time of heightened sensitivity regarding these matters.
We don’t know what he did, or didn’t do, and how many people complained. We don’t know how many people assessed his case, who they were, what their backgrounds are.
It’s a tremendously opaque situation – which I agree is very unfortunate given that a man’s reputation and career – and the health and well-being of his employees – are at stake.
I imagine,though,that now that Montoya has been terminated and has an attorney that he has been given full access to the report – and he can proceed accordingly and can contest his termination if he desires.
Deciding to take legal action, of course, is never an easy decision. It is tremendously expensive for one thing. Now that Montoya does not have a job – and his job prospects have considerably dimmed – he has to weigh the risk of losing the case – and probably significantly depleting his financial resources against the chance of winning possibly quite a large judgment. He must weigh the fact this is an era of high sensitivity to this issue.
Even if a person feels they have been treated wrongly taking legal action may not be the right option.
Along this same line of thought, Dr. Montoya’s statement that he did not know the complaint came from someone on the CFS Initiative team until reading it on June 4th in The Daily. This would seem to be an easily verifiable statement that if proven false would seriously undermine Dr. Montoya’s credibility. He’s not stupid and I can’t imagine him making something like this up if he knows that Stanford could easily show this to be a lie. At the same time, I struggle to envision a comprehensive and fair investigation that would not include informing Dr. Montoya of the details surrounding the allegations.
The only other explanation would be that there was so much evidence of serious long standing violations of university policy involving numerous individuals that nothing Dr. Montoya could have said would have made any difference to Stanford. Even if that were the case I can’t see how it would benefit Stanford to move forward without giving Dr. Montoya a chance to defend himself.
Was Dr. Montoya telling the truth when he said the info in The Daily on 6/4 was news to him? If so, Stanford has some explaining to do!
Respectfully, Cort, the possibility that ‘a large group’ of female subordinates have plotted together to bring fabricated sexual assault charges against a more powerful tenured supervisor is an extremely remote one. This is not a situation where a disgruntled (or psychology unstable) employee is acting vindictively. Indeed it is the sheer number of women involved that makes the case such a compelling one.
And of course Dr Montoya is trying to put the best face possible on these allegations. It is never otherwise in these situations.
@ Peter – I’m not sure that we know the “sheer number of people” that filed a complaint. If I’m not mistaken, this was according to a person (or persons) giving a statement to The Daily, a student newspaper. The statement may be completely accurate or it might inadvertently (or otherwise) have been written in a way to give that gives the impression of a larger group of women. Without more information directly from the university and their investigation, I find myself needing to withhold judgement beyond the conclusion that something went terribly wrong here.
For me, even though it’s a student newspaper, I trust the Daily News. Given that it’s at Stanford it surely must attempt to adhere to the strongest standards. If it reported incorrectly, particularly in this case, it would open itself and the University to a libel lawsuit. No one has come forward to my knowledge to dispute it’s report thus far. For me I assume that it’s reporting accurately.
@ Cort – I’m not suggesting that The Daily got the quote from the CFS team member wrong, just that it did not come through the Stanford Investigatory process. I’d be curious to know if they confirmed the accuracy of the statement by getting more than one source regarding details of “the meeting.” If so, then that’s significant.
@anon – Yes, I hear you on that. Perhaps the facts have not been properly represented although it is hard to believe Stanford would let such shoddy libelous reporting stay on the record.
In any case my primary point stands: IF you have multiple reliable accusers of sexual misconduct you ALWAYS have an accused who has behaved unethically. Large numbers of women (or men) do not plot together to destroy an innocent man’s – or woman’s – career. Especially in the context of a highly professional work environment like medical research.
I agree. That fact it appears that quite a few people complained – we don’t know how many – suggests a broad pattern of behavior existed. Somehow I don’t think a small clinic serving people with ME/CFS at Stanford is likely to be a hotbed of conspiracy…and certainly not against the ME/CFS community. They would be the last ones, I would think, to engage in that, or to tolerate actions against it.
You have got to be joking – or completely out of your mind – to say, “I don’t think a small clinic serving people with ME/CFS is likely to be a hotbed if conspiracy”!!!!!!?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I think you misunderstand me and I hope I’m misunderstanding you. I’m trying to say that Montoya’s employees – who work with ME/CFS patients day in and day out – are the last people to engage in a conspiracy against ME/CFS.
Maybe the conspiracy was devised by Apple to promote emoji usage. 😉
Having worked for the Federal Government in a limited capacity, I would not be shocked if there was something wrong happening. I would like to think it’s not likely, but I believe in the possibility. Ruth, PhD Thanks to everyone who caught the IP address! Saved me a few cortisol bursts!
In 1970, an article by two British psychiatrists based on a few hours perusal of 15-year-old hospital notes concluded that the Royal Free epidemic of 1955 was an outbreak of ‘mass hysteria’. It may not have got that much notice, except that at the same time it was published, TIME, then the most influential publication in the English language, published a short article titled: Behavior. Without mentioning the name of the illness, reference to the source of the information, or including the article in a section referring to science, or medicine, or health, it ridiculed the gullibility of doctors looking for the cause of an illness comparable to the dancing manias of the middle ages and concluded that the final proof that it was just hysteria was that most of the sufferers were women. This article defined medical and public perceptions of ME for years to come…some would argue, from then on.
Research funding dried up, the major medical figures of the time who took ME seriously were discredited. This was the just first victory for those who insist, and continue to insist that MECFS is, (now under many names (MUS, FND, conversion disorder, somatoform disorder etc.) basically hysteria. Books confirming this hypothesis become best-sellers….Showalter’s ‘Hystories’, in the 80’s, get awards…’It’s All In Your Head’, the Wellcome Award, in 2017.
There is, on the internet, a copy of an undated letter from Strauss to Fukuda (who went on to become head of the WHO) on having created a set of diagnostic criteria that, focusing on fatigue, could encourage research just on that symptom, thus losing ME as a distinct diagnostic category, which he regarded as a desirable outcome.
The CDC diverted funding intended for ME research into other programs over a period of years in the ‘80s. Recent promises to take research and research funding seriously have been met with a reduction in the already miniscule funds allocated.
Research laboratories in the US have been separated from their universities for unexplained reasons. Montoya himself was warned against taking up ME/CFS as a research topic.
In the UK, the psychiatrists have an unassailable grip on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of ME/CFS….NICE won’t even withdraw CBT/GET from treatment recommendations, and the psychiatrists will be given the final say over the outcome of the current NICE Review of the treatment guideline.
David Tuller is engaged in an ongoing effort, via carefully well-reasoned, statistically supported questioning of PACE and other misleading research papers and research practices…which the establishment continue to do their best to ignore.
The background to this is psychiatric association with UNUM, and having been invited by the New Labour Government to get involved in a complete overhaul of the UK welfare system, with a view to getting as many people off benefits as possible. Continued and very much strengthened by the Conservatives and their continued attack on all public services in the name of austerity, ME/CFS, a long-lasting, very disabling disease is at the center of the firing line.
This whole programme depends on continuing to label it a psychiatric, rather than a medical condition.
The IOM report, love it or hate it, was obviously convened in a way that provided the best chance of getting a rubber stamp for the psychiatric model. Instead, it confirmed that it was not psychogenic. It stated that the defining factor of this disease was that ‘exertion of any kind….may adversely affect many organ systems…’. Psychiatrists were extremely angry about this, and continue to deny its relevance.
In the UK, doctors who treat ME/CFS patients as having a physical disease are brought up before the GMC, and some have lost their license and their careers. These complaints are not made by patients, they are made by doctors insisting on the BPS model. Children with severe ME being given the necessary care by their parents are taken over by Social Services and sectioned into psychiatric wards as suffering from FII…Family Induced Illness…and cruelly treated.
Considering this wider medico/political context, I read that a very well-known doctor and researcher involved with ME/CFS has been sacked from his university post because of complaints from his female staff, of sexual harassment and assault.
His patients are very surprised, he at least purports to be surprised, the ME/CFS community are surprised.
Within this wider context of how ME/CFS patients, and their doctors, medical researchers and advocates are treated, I think we should cast a wider net in considering this situation.
It is interesting that it is staff from the ME/CFS lab who are complaining, and not other staff he has been involved with. Maybe he treats them worse, or it’s just that others have also suffered but have not complained. Maybe, since these complainants have apparently been respectfully treated by the university, others should be invited to come forward.
Getting Dr Montoya eliminated from his job certainly is very much to the advantage of those who want ME/CFS, its patients, its doctors, its researchers undermined and discredited.
The fact that the university have sacked him apparently without any of the prior procedures one might expect, and that this is a very unusual thing for them to do suggests either quite extreme behaviour on Dr. Montoya’s part, or could raise the question of where the pressure has come from for the university to take this step.
This all sounds like conspiracy theory….but there are so many really extreme facts about this disease and its history..there is so much evidence of hypocrisy, secrets and lies throughout…that we are not being unreasonable to say…at least look further than fighting over metoo, victim’s rights; and the misogyny that for too long has given abusive men free rein.
There may very well be women who have been seriously abused by a misleadingly charming man. I have no time for anyone who claims to be confused between a hug and a grope, cultural or otherwise, there has always been a clear distinction between a hug and a grope.
But this all seems to me to play a bit too well into the hands of those who will delight to dismantle and destroy any real attempt to solve and cure ME/CFS.
This is not taking sides, invalidating women or automatically assuming that males are abusive.
This is an invitation to be careful and precise about whatever the facts may be. And an invitation to consider that power relations beyond the immediate situation may also be in play.
ME/CFS may well be the real victim.
Nancy, very powerful!
ME patients have been mishandled for decades. Some very wrong decisions have been made. Some people like White and Hunt seem to go to a very large extend to maintain the status quo.
But conspiracy is not what I would be most worried about. It’s the complete lack of openness on to how Stanford handled this case, while still preserving the anonymity of all victims.
From what I read so far a single person at Stanford handled the case. A lawyer was added to the team.
When truly respecting the privacy of the victims, there is no need for their names to be in the report that is handed to both the accused, his supervisor and the universities board or for the victims to appear before and be questioned by the board.
Now let us hope this one person was not the person victims had to go to to report the offenses. Let us also hope that this one person had no say in what lawyer did handle the case. If not, Stanford would have created a massive opportunity for abuse of power for this person. Let us hope Stanford was not that naive!
If they would have done so, and there is no way for us to tell but some signs indicate Stanford’s procedures to handle these kind of accusations may not be that much better then in the time cover up was rumored to be the method of choice, then it all would depend on the ethics or complete lack of ethics of said person.
Potentially giving power to a single person to receive complaints, chose the lawyer to be hired, both of them jointly interview victims and write a report and having them handing over the document to the board and defending it in the name of the victims would be utterly moronic in an environment filled with a large percentage of very power hungry individuals but not totally unlikely in any organization that likes to see these kind of problems magically disappear without having to touch the case itself. It would give that person both the power to make it a far better workplace or to brake near any individual’s career.
This whole case needs a strong clarification of the used procedures, to be handed out to a professional external organization that is not chosen by any person who worked on the case at Stanford or, if crimes are committed, to justice.
That will benefit all involved: victims, accused and the entire ME community.
It could also end up being a winner, believe it or not, but stay tuned for that idea.
Montoya’s center has been open for over ten years. It’s brought money into the University and he’s enrolled a wide variety of researchers to study it – and they have had positive findings.
Three symposia on campus have been held, Ron Davis – who has been mentioned as being the short list for a Nobel Prize, has enrolled other researchers, including some powerful figures who run major labs (Mike Snyder, Mark Davis) to study this disease. Davis also enrolled heads of departments across the University to support his application for an NIH funded research center.
There is no reason for Stanford to want ME/CFS research to be discontinued. Attempting to do that would cause major figures in the University – people who are personal friends of Ron Davis and have worked with him for years – to become quite upset and register their disapproval.
This is not the 80’s, 90’s or even the 2000’s. ME/CFS is now pretty firmly entrenched in Stanford. As Davis’s and Snyder’s and others work proceeds and gets results I imagine ME/CFS will become more entrenched in the University.
Dr. Montoya deserves the right to defend himself. I hope he is given that opportunity. Those of us in the CFS community deserve to know the details of this case, especially since many of us have donated money to him (his research) On another note, there are those of you, on both sides of this issue, that present your opinions in unpleasant and antagonistic ways. Your bitterness is palpable. I was speaking with one CFS researcher who told me that a very prominent CFS researcher is largely exiting the field because of the surliness of many of the people with CFS he has dealt with. Folks, researchers are the people that hold the key to opening the exit door to this disease. Please check your attitudes at the he door when dealing with them! And the same holds true for how some of you talk to Cort. Be assertive, not aggressive.
This is a VERY important point. I am finding out that we have more of reputation as a difficult community and its spread a lot further than I had imagined. That reputation is emphatically not helping us in many areas. Some outside advocacy groups, researchers (and I imagine even philanthropists) are reluctant to engage with us because of it; i.e. we are losing some potential allies.
We can be aggressive, professional and effective without scaring people off. It’s unfortunate but negative news travels faster and makes more of an impression than positive news. A few people can make it much more difficult to move forward.
We really need to be disciplined. Check our anger at the door and funnel it into effective action. That is the best revenge!
That’s EXACTLY the message the Deep State spooks running the eugenics & genocide agenda want out there regardless of Jose Montoya’s justice status…..they are exchanging some serious high-fives with each other right now, and Bill Reeves is being served a little ice water in Hell.
Bringing the Deep State, eugenics and genocide into a professor’s termination because of improper behavior toward his employees doesn’t help your case or us. It just looks weird!
I was surprised that Dr. Montoya’s statement mentioned the same cultural differences which I theorized might be in play in my commentary in Cort’s original report. I would also add ‘age’ as exemplified by presidential candidate Joe Biden thinking nothing inappropriate by ‘smelling women’s hair’ as an expression of comfort, affection or support. His behaviors were mostly considered benign (at least by men) by people of his generation.
I am not going to weigh in as to whether or not this is THE cause of Dr. Montoya’s dismissal–or even if he is ‘guilty’ or not. I do, however, want to say that thoughts similar to Nancy Blake’s comments also crossed my mind. Sometimes, an employer or an institution or a government will use an ‘infraction’ as a reason to get rid of a person for causes unrelated to the accusation and causes which might be difficult to define or are not usually behaviors worthy of dismissal.
Again, I’m not saying this is the case–merely speculating.
When one thinks about ME/CFS, there is no diagnostic test, no clear cut treatment, nor is there any widely accepted disease theory. That makes Stanford’s ME/CFS Clinic a department without any solid medical footing–and perhaps that is part of the problem.
Thank goodness they have Ron Davis whose brilliant mind could possibly be one of the reasons Stanford is giving him such latitude in pursuing ME/CFS at all. We all know his efforts are because of the love for his very ill son. Some at Stanford may not be much interested in devoting energy to this disease as it is not so glamorous or has the status (or funding) of other, more dramatic disorders. I don’t know.
Besides all the debate here, I want to know if Stanford has plans to find another ME/CFS Clinic director or just let it exist ‘in a corner’ and give it just enough attention so research giant Ron Davis will continue to supply Stanford with his many other insights and subsequent patents.
Cort, have you or anybody else gotten hints of what Stanford plans to do with our Clinic?
Here’s what I was told by Janet DaFoe who has talked to someone higher up at Stanford. Stanford is not at all looking to get rid of the clinic. They believe it provides a valuable service to the ME/CFS community. That said, it’s fate is uncertain as the Director is now gone and funding has to be found.
What has crossed my mind is that if the University wanted to make a public statement showing that it’s changed it’s ways in this area, then someone like Jose Montoya – who is not particularly high up in the ranks and who does run what must be a somewhat controversial program – would be the perfect person to do it with.
That’s my more paranoid self thinking! Hopefully, it’s not so.
I commented on this post yesterday and can’t seem to find that comment today. I live across the river from the shady IP address poster so hope my comment didn’t get caught up in that?
If my comment unintentionally broke some policy, I’d like to know what it was so i don’t repeat the offence.
It certainly didn’t Kat. I will search for your comments and get in touch.
According to the National sexual violence center, only 2-10% of sexual assault allegations are false. And most of those that are false are made by an individual (usually mentally ill) person and they do not name a specific culprit.
There’s never a shortage of misogynists (and that includes women) ready to defend a man accused of sexual misconduct at all costs. It doesn’t matter to them that a LARGE GROUP OF WOMEN have come forward with allegations. “He was courteous and professional with me, so he couldn’t have hurt anyone else! My personal experience trumps everyone else’s!”
God forbid we ruin a man’s reputation. Who cares about the women who are traumatized for life?
Having lived in Latin American countries for several years, I find it really insensitive to suggest that it’s his “Latin culture” that caused him to behave this way. That’s not how professional men in Latin America behave. Except for sexual harassers, obviously. Anyway, how long has he lived in the US? Surely he knows how to behave in this culture.
And as for the utterly idiotic comparisons of sexual assault allegations to the witchhunts that occurred in Europe between the years 1400 and 1800, just stop. Hundreds of thousands of women were murdered due to violent patriarchal beliefs. Maybe choose a different analogy for your pathetic arguments.
Where I come from we are taught to ‘speak as you find’. I have always found Dr Jose Montoya to a first rate doctor, a powerful motivator of his patients and a first rate human being. The extent of the positive impact he has had on our family is immeasurable. His departure from the world of ME/CFS, as doctor, researcher and advocate will be an unspeakable tragedy. Stanford should rather seek to facilitate a solution to the real and perceived issues that will enable a man of his ability to continue to serve a group of people whose invisible illness devastates lives. This action will do nothing to help them.I would ask his accusers to think of that and be sure that he and his patients deserve it.
Thanks for covering such a difficult issue for the community with articles and clarifying comments.
There’s such a strong incentive for us to want to cling to any excuses and dismiss the claims. Very hard to believe that someone who’s done so much for patients and research would jeopardise that. But I don’t think there’s an outright contradiction there; both good and bad can happen together.
Those colleges coming forward will, no doubt, have been *painfully* aware of the damage following uncovering the problems. So we we should strongly suspect that their working environment really had become untenable to take such a bold step. Also that Stanford will have had strong incentive to avoid causing such a stir, when there were many lesser actions available, if the situation were not so certain or severe.
I think we should probably try to look for the positives, even if they are more uncertain and difficult to spot, compared to the loss of one prominent individual; this has hopefully resolved a festering problem for an entire, hard working team. That alone should reap rewards, going forwards. And I don’t know the details, but I doubt this undoes everything he’s achieved, or even how much it will impact the things he was involved with, going forwards.
I think it’s a good point that Stanford or any University doesn’t have a lot to gain by taking an action like this. They do get some points for showing that they’re taking action but by taking action they’re also acknowledging this situation has existed probably for quite some time – without their taking action. I think more than anything it casts a cloud over the University.
I recall that Stanford had a lot of bad press in the early 1990s over 2 cases close together, one regarding sexism hampering a woman neurosurgeon’s career and one regarding a male who harassed a few female students. I lived in the SF Bay then and we saw much in the news on these. Brief newspaper story summing these up:
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-06-27-mn-2069-story.html
This was not Stanford HR department’s first experience with hostile work environments/damage control/covering their legal liabilities.
I can only imagine the number of complaints Stanford must get on a regular basis. That in itself is compelling and chilling to me.
There are plenty of professors there from other cultures whose societal norms could cause them trouble. If this is the first time Stanford has terminated, it must be more serious than a bit of hugging or hand-holding.
A consistent thread in these comments has been that Dr. Montoya can sue Stanford. Although I have no idea about Dr. Montoya’s financial situation, university professors don’t make large salaries. Hiring a good attorney (one who could take on the lawyers Stanford has on retainer) would cost a fortune and could leave Dr. Montoya bankrupt in addition to having a career in ruins.
Very good point and one that I just noted. Losing a case like that could leave Dr. Montoya in a horrible financial situation. Our legal system puts people without a lot of money at a huge disadvantage….
“Dr. Montoya can sue Stanford”
I have seen a few cases of people filling suit for unfair resignation. These cases were not related to any crime or unacceptable behavior. They were related to weather the evaluations if they performed their job well were fair or not.
Point here is that these court cases concerned only if the correct procedures were followed.
The law suit was about the fired persons having had received for example the correct evaluations as is foreseen in their employment terms.
E.g. if they were to be evaluated yearly, was that done so and in a timely matter? Was that done by a person authorized to do so? Was the person given timely and clear feedback and the chance to correct and improve his professional performance or to meet performance goals in the future…?
I’m well aware that employment regulations are more strict in my country then in the United States. But as many said: you can’t fire a professor with tenure just like that. So probably universities have procedures for firing them that hold legal rights for both employer and employed.
I assume a legal case over unfair resignation would be a case only over the procedural matter. For a court to decide if the fundamentals of the case justified firing the professor, it likely would require a juristic investigation into the facts themselves. It seems this has not been done so far.
Without it, Montaya likely only can win a financial compensation for unjust resignation if our laws are remotely similar. He can’t get his job back. He won’t get his reputation back as long as the case isn’t opened up before a court.
That I think would require him to file a complaint for slander against unknown persons and the university. In practice it would start with him charging complaints for slander against the board of directors of Stanford. That would require them to testify in court. There they would elaborate on the procedure followed. Then, if court decides to go through with it it would likely identify key persons who dealt with the case. That seems to be a single Stanford member and the unnamed lawyer.
The next logical step would be for justice to issue a court warrant for searching the university office of the Stanford staff member, the department he works for and his or her home. The same would be logical for the lawyer in case, but justice would realize that would be a tough one as the lawyer likely would block any search in process and hide behind confidentiality. After the search warrants would be executed, both persons would be questioned.
After that lawyers of the staff member, the consulted lawyer and Montoya’s lawyer would squabble for a long time in court.
If this would be close to reality, Montoya can win a financial compensation but getting his name cleared in court would be very very difficult. That wouldn’t even restore his reputation.
If he ever wants to have a fulfilling job in the future, having a short statement made by his lawyer and refuse to comment on it and move on is his best chance irrelevant of weather he is guilty or not. Trying to clear his name would draw national press interest.
That is why clear, just and credible procedures to handle such cases are so important for both victims and accused.
That is also why handing the case to a single staff member is beyond believe. This person is given, weather he or she desires or loathes this, a tremendous amount of power. This person can be of excellent ethics or be tempted to take advantage of it. But this person is a clever person working at a top university and being not the lowest in rank. This person must be very well aware of the great responsibility (in the case of outstanding ethics) or great power (in case of a person with deep love for his or her personal interest) that comes with it.
If desired, such person can color cases, thicken case or even create cases or bail out individuals with few chance of it firing back to him or her. A person that has been given that position (outstanding ethics) or managed to secure that position (the other case) is smart enough to either make the best of it for the organization or hide his or her tracks very well.
Again, I do not speak of what happened or did not happen and certainly do not wish to defend offenders. I once more point out that having a clear, fair, transparent and working procedure is utmost crucial in such cases for all involved. I did not see much evidence of that so far. But then again, so few details are known so I cannot know if they have a solid and effective procedure in place.
I’d say in many cases: darkness is the friend of the criminal, transparency is the friend of the victim.
Transparency can go hand in hand with total victim privacy. Victim privacy is no excuse for procedures not to be transparent.
The reason that I’m not so worried about having one faculty member handle Montoya’s case is that I don’t think the faculty member was critical – I think the investigation done by an outside attorney who presumably is skilled in this area is THE critical aspect of this whole process.
In order to protect itself – to show that it was acting properly and taking the allegations seriously (a huge issue in these areas) – I assume Stanford hired an attorney specializing in these areas.
Companies have to gather extensive evidence to protect themselves against a possible lawsuit. It was surely a long and exhausting process. I imagine there’s a folder an inch thick detailing the issues in this case and the reason for the decision.
Stanford’s goal was to show that they proceeded in a fair and objective manner and that given the evidence they received, that that they acted reasonably. If they, for instance, gave Dr. Montoya a slap on the wrist for really egregious acts, they would have been open to a lawsuit by his employees… If they went too far with Montoya, they would be open to a lawsuit from him.
Once the attorney’s report was done, which must have showed the accusations and alleged behavior in excruciating detail, the report – given the hot button nature of this issue, and the rarity of a professor being terminated – went to the highest levels of the University.
Then the report was poured over, more questions were made, Stanford surely looked at how such matters were dealt with in similar situations in other Universities, and the decision was made.
Dr. Montoya and his attorney will have been provided access to the report. My guess is, given this occurred at one of the top Universities in the country which can, if anything, be predicted to dot its i’s and cross it’s T’s; i.e. produce a rigorous investigation that would stand critique from any quarter, Dr. Montoya will not find an opportunity to contest his termination.
Nobody can predict the future but my guess is that we will not hear anything else about this. Time will tell.
Dr. Jose Montoya is totally, completely, unwaveringly, irrevocably, irreparably ruined. Destroyed.
His whole life is completely damaged and torn asunder no matter what happens from here on out.
And without a clear judicial finding of malicious accusations with punitive damages levied against the accusers, and uncompromising broad public broadcast from the highest executive levels of every sector as such, he will never recover from this.
From that split moment in time of first publication of this story – till the end of all time – it never mattered again what anyone thinks: at that split moment in time Dr. Jose Montoya became the next chapter of this horror show.
Without an unequivocally strong public exoneration, you can permanently file his name alongside Elaine DeFrietas, Judy Mikovits, Ivar Wickman, et. al.
What does Montoya have to do with researchers whose work has not panned out? His work is not in question – his acts with his employees are. Plus, it’s not as if these researchers were treated unfairly. Studies simply failed to validate their findings.
Elaine DeFreitas – all of her retroviral findings including those done in diseases outside of ME/CFS were eventually invalidated. She, herself, was unable to replicate her findings and neither was an ME/CFS group years later. Numerous studies since then using much better techniques have failed to find evidence of HTLV retroviruses in ME/cFS.
Judy Mikovits – The NIH convened a group of top research laboratories to investigate XMRV and all of them concluded that XMRV was not associated with ME/CFS. They were unable to do that because they didn’t use XMRV contaminated ME/CFS samples like Judy Mikovits did. It was later learned that the virus got into the samples via the tissue used in the culture.
On her way to finally admitting what was clearly so Dr. Mikovits accused the scientific community of engaging in an effort to damage people with ME/CFS. Among her wildest statements to the press were that XMRV was found in mother’s breast milk and that XMRV was going to be worst than HIV/AIDS…
Uh huh. And vaccines are completely safe.
Critical thinking is obviously out of fashion, and ME/CFS advocacy is dead. dead. dead.
God, I can feel a crash coming on and I’m only half way through all these comments 🙂
Stanford statement of support for ME/CFS patients and research are at the bottom of this page:
https://stanfordhealthcare.org/medical-clinics/infectious-disease-clinic.html
If a ” large group of women who have worked under Dr. Montoya came forward with extensive allegations of sexual misconduct, assault and harassment, The allegations included multiple instances of Dr. Montoya attempting unsolicited sexual acts” this is more than just someone who is “affectionate” or hugs people. Although we do not know the full story yet and must wait for the correct legal process, it is dangerous and wrong to discredit the victims. It takes a lot of courage for victims to speak out. Some of the comments here show why victims of sexual assault and harassment do not come forward.
Weak statement and apology from a weak little man. Using cultural differences as an excuse to rationalize inappropriate behavior is itself insulting on so many different levels. I’ve been to 23 different countries, including numerous countries in Latin America and the Middle East. If somebody wants to know how they treat women there, perhaps they should do more that watch a Mexican TV show and attempt to compare what they see in that show to Columbian culture. Machismo lol. Absurd! Also, to insinuate that an educated tenured professor and researcher at Stanford, who has been on and living around American college campuses for decades, didn’t know any better to not behave this way is even worse and appalling than the act itself. I’m a retired Soldier, 26 years Active Duty Infantry, with 6 combat deployments (66 months total) in third world countries all around the world. And you know what? 90% of the people I met over there have more respect for women than this clown. I’m extremely sick with MECFS but I will NEVER stoop so low as to advocate for someone like Montoya to get a “fair shake.” The dude’s written statement reeks of cowardice, He makes clear in his statement to point out that there was never any sexual affair. This message is meant for his wife and his kids, not for the victims. Don’t you guys see this?Rather than put the sword in his chest and take the fall gracefully and accept responsibility for his actions , this con artist tries to blame his actions on cultural differences and make himself appear as a victim himself. This guy is scum, the lowest of all scum. And anyone who continues to support Montoya ought to take a hard look at themselves in the mirror. Let’s not forget the victims here! I do NOT want to be a part of an MECFS community that continues to support someone like Montoya.
I HAVE READ THROUGH AS MANY COMMENTS AS I POSSIBLY COULD SO I CAN WRITE MINE WITH OBJECTIVITY. We have all heard the quote… “Good name in man or woman, aye my lord, is the imminent jewel of thy soul’………He who steals my purse steals trash… but he who steals my good name… steals not that enriches him, but makes me poor indeed… I am a Newfoundlander by birth and grew up there where hugs, and outward display of affection and calling each other “my love, my dear, my darling was frequently done. I love hugs and give hugs and believe in hugs. In fact, I am a double hugger.. Perhaps if I were a man, I could be accused of a form of intimate abuse or getting into another’s personal space uninvited. Human beings are afraid to go close to each other any more for fear of being charged with misconduct. People are afraid to go near a child now when they are crying or hurt for fear of being “charged” I don’t know what the answer is, but I will reserve my judgement about this man’s demise and hope that righteousness will prevail. Too many good people have been destroyed by another’s evilness and that is not goodness or merciful.
Just chiming in to say that it is important for CFS community to stay out and let the process take its course. It made CFS community look like a nut case when some people politicized and tried to make martyr out of Judy Mikovits, we don’t need another. Not sayin’ that Dr. Montoya is a fraud, just sayin’ people shouldn’t take side just because he is “one of us”.
Amen.
Double Amen…This is NOT an attack on ME/CFS! Trying to turn this into an attack on ME/CFS -like when Dr. Mikovits tried to turn the negative findings on XMRV into some conspiracy against ME/CFS made her and us look really weird. She even tried to divide the ME/CFS community into the good guys (her and the WPI) and the bad guys (the SMCI and anyone who opposed her).
There is no cheese down that tunnel…
Bad things happen sometimes.
The argument that you keep making is that Stanford must have done the right thing here, and therefore that Dr. Montoya must be guilty of something really bad, and therefore that the ME/CFS community should just move along in terms of their concerns about this case.
And that argument continues to be unconvincing to me, based on what I have seen of how other similar cases in universities have been handled recently.
So it seems that we are at a stalemate on this, I guess.
@ Cort and @ Lisa Petrison – I have to agree with Lisa. Just because Stanford did it doesn’t mean that they did it right. It’s not necessary to suggest any ulterior motives, just an honest (but possibly misdirected or over zealous – or not) effort to protect their employees and Stanford’s own interests and reputation.
Attorneys often ask clients “Which mistake are you willing to defend, not moving aggressively enough and appearing to the public as though you were negligent or acting aggressively and having to apologize (and possibly get sued by) an individual?” It can boil down to protecting reputation versus fear of liability.
It might also be the case that Stanford did nothing wrong but none of us has enough information to make that call. Unfortunately, we may never know. What we do know is that a lot of patients will be severely harmed if they lose Dr. Montoya as their doctor and that the loss of Dr. Montoya’s future research would be a significant blow to all patients.
If we want to make an analogy to the XMRV situation, then what I would suggest has happened so far is as if in 2011 the NIH had said something like:
“We are going to conduct a study and see if we think that there is anything to this XMRV thing, but we are going to do it totally in secret and not give you any details about what transpired, and then we will share with the world just our ruling, and if the ruling is that if there is no connection between XMRV and ME/CFS, then everyone should just move on. And no one should question what happened with regard to the investigation process, because we are the NIH and you should trust us.”
I don’t think that would have been acceptable at all.
And I think that if that had been what the NIH had done, the ME/CFS community would have been right to step in and object vigorously.
That’s not at all what happened with XMRV, though.
Rather, Dr. Alter set up a fair trial so that all the laboratories involved had a chance to prove their case. And then presented all the findings in a published paper that anyone could read.
At which point, everyone could see for himself or herself whether justice had been done. And then we as a community could move on.
That kind of transparent process is much, much different than our accepting the argument that “The NIH must be right and we should accept them at their word even though they have not provided any details” or “Stanford must be right and so we should accept them at their word even though they have not provided any details.”
Because certainly, as patients, we do not have the right to say “XMRV is a factor in ME/CFS” or “Dr. Montoya is innocent,” just because that is what we might like to be the case.
We do, however, have the right to insist that procedural justice be done with regard to making sure that the investigations of issues or people that are important to us are done fairly.
And I am not in any way convinced at this point that the investigation in this Stanford case has been done fairly.
Note: For those who are unfamiliar with the XMRV case, here is a factual summary about it.
https://paradigmchange.me/me/xmrv/
Lisa Petrison, Ph.D.
You worded this very well.
Our division as patients may be a reflection of what happened in the past to the ME community.
Having professors from three thrustworthy institutions (“The PACE Trial was led by Professor Peter White of Queen Mary University London (retired), Professor Michael Sharpe of Oxford University and Professor Trudie Chalder of Kings College London.”) and some of their respective staff doing a 5M pound research,
Having a peer reviewed publication in the UKs first and foremost medical journal, The Lancet being almost an institution by itself,
Having a paper produced by scientific method, published for all to see able to scrutinize on all details making sure no such work could ever withstand time if any major flows were found in either it’s results nor methodology were find,
Such combined effort of a large and diverse group of very skilled people coming from so many different places would never ever ever leave room for any shred of doubt would it? Yet the total opposite harmed our community very badly and still does.
A saying says: never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence.
One can say that Stanford has very skilled people. But the above are top in their field too.
But such cases as the Stanford case are often “hot potato” cases: nobody wants to deal with these “highly explosive cases”. Whatever decision you take you’ll be at the eye of the storm and may end up in a lawsuit if you handle it wrong.
So these cases are often passed from desk to desk till someone either has the guts to handle it or hasn’t got the guts to say no. The people knowledgeable in the matter at hand may be the first to realize the risk of handling the case and pass it on to others if they can. So the case easily can land with a person very competent in something completely different than what skills are needed.
As to the independent lawyer added to the case, investigation may mean anything from a thorough investigation into the facts itself over “investigating” and combing out the universities code of conduct, regulations and precedents to just investigate how to make sure Stanford and its board are safe from any persecution.
I hear on this forum a reflection of the pain and suffering caused by obscure procedures, hasty decisions, a lack of interest in the case at hand… coming form institutions beyond any single shred of doubt. Yet most of us feel and face the pain and suffering they caused any single day.
I certainly didn’t suggest that this matter be treated like XMRV. This is not a open scientific investigation. It’s an internal company matter.
You and I may have a desire to see the evidence laid out for and against Dr. Montoya but neither of us have any “rights”in the matter. Dr. Montoya has rights – he could sue if he believes they’ve been abrogated. Stanford has rights. I assume that Dr. Montoya’s accusers have some rights but we as a community have no rights at all. Should we be able to compel Dr. Montoya’s accusers to publicly come forward and state in perhaps embarrassing detail what occurred?
It’s possible that you or I could conclude that Dr. Montoya was treated unfairly. It’s also possible Dr. Montoya would be horrified if the full disclosure of the report were to take place.
I say that because that assume that everything – as it had to be to justify firing Dr. Montoya – was carefully documented by Stanford.
What I believe is fair is that if a university employer is going to terminate someone based on accusations such as these, and in so doing not just cost him his livelihood at his current job but also ruin his other career prospects elsewhere and blacken his good name, that the same standards should apply as if it were a criminal trial.
And that is, that the accused should be allowed to know exactly what the accusations were, so that an adequate defense can be mounted.
And that if the accused so desires, all of the details of how the case was decided should be made available for public discussion, so that a public assessment can be made with regard to whether it was handled appropriately.
And without his having to spend a large amount of money to sue in order to have it happen.
And that insofar as that indeed is what the accused desires, that it is appropriate for others to express support for that.
Certainly, I personally would express such support in this circumstance.
Because otherwise, letting the whole thing be handled behind closed doors, as has occurred here, leaves far too much room for abuse to occur.
And since I have heard of abuses indeed having occurred in other university cases over recent months, I have no confidence that similar abuses have not happened here as well.
Lisa Petrison, Ph.D.
But Lisa why are you assuming that Dr. Montoya doesn’t have access to all that? He, like any other employee has the option to sue for wrongful termination and he has an attorney. I assume that he has access to everything that the University based its decision on. Employees do have some protections – particularly if the University openly states he was terminated for “wrongful conduct”.
From a website:
“To avoid negative repercussions such as wrongful-termination lawsuits, companies should have written procedures for firing employees, said Rob Wilson, CEO of Employco USA, a human resource outsourcing company based in Westmont, Ill. During the termination meeting with the employee, it’s important to present all documents about job performance, such as work reviews and written warnings, he stressed.”
That is a reputation killer which is exactly why I would be shocked if the University didn’t have quite a bit of evidence to back that up. They brought in an attorney precisely to make sure that the investigation and its outcome were properly done – and would stand up.
Of course, we would like to know that evidence is. I just don’t know that we’ll ever get it.
I imagine that Montoya has the option to publicly release the report on him if he wishes..
It has just been explained to me that it’s quite likely that we will never know more than we know today. Firing someone for cause is considered an internal company matter. If Stanford was to release more than that it could open themselves up to a lawsuit. Whatever happens from here on in will likely happen entirely in-house – unless someone publicly comes forward.
All we know is that Montoya has been accused of inappropriate behavior, that after an investigation the University agreed he had engaged in inappropriate behavior and that they fired him because of that. We also know that Montoya stated that he has never acted in anything other than a professional manner.
That might be as much as we ever get.
That’s not the way hospital MD medical boards work. The MD is not given employee rights, nor due process. Dr m did not even know. May not ever know who accused him if anyone did at all. It wasn’t handled privately but unfairly announced /leaked to the public. They destroyed him. Patients will have to go to Colombia to see him as he will never work again here. Really. You all think this is ok to do to someone (even if he was accused)?
As long as Dr. Montoya can make a contribution to the research he should continue. We have very few talented and dedicated people helping us; it would be a shame to lose anyone. I just hope that this matter can be resolved in a way that does not harm the progress that he, and others, have made so far.
How has Stanford handled past allegations of abuse by its professors?
https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/12/04/stanford-report-details-frequency-response-to-sexual-violence
https://www.kqed.org/news/11633019/years-later-women-find-their-voice-to-speak-out-against-sexual-misconduct-by-professors
https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/12/14/16687940/academia-sexual-harassment-usc-rochester-universities
This makes Dr. Montoya’s firing seem a bit too abrupt to me. He’s only the 2nd professor fired from Stanford in decades, the first one was inciting his students to protest our involvement in the war in Laos.
I have no idea if Montoya is guilty as charged, or innocent, but something smells rotten at Stanford.
You could also interpret it as Dr. Montoya must have done something really, really wrong in order to get this rare kind of penalty.
Someone who’s been connected to Stanford for decades that she, too, could only remember one other professor who was terminated. It’s incredibly rare. That person said this this is a really big deal at Stanford- it’s nothing that they would take lightly – just the opposite.
We have one person’s word against Stanford’s decision – surely done at the highest levels, the women who complained of their treatment, and an investigation done by an attorney.
For me, unless more comes out,the weight of the evidence right now is clearly tilted in one direction.
I believe the allegations.
I was the very first CFS RN Study Coordinator working under him. I left because of this…I was silenced by his threats, so the best option was to leave. I kept quiet. I’m glad others spoke up and were given justice, but I’m saddened for those patients treating under him…his patients loved him.
Thanks for providing your experience.
Something definitely smells rotten, and it smells like alottayparties have been rolling in the rot.
Here’s an example of how one very prestigious dealt with a horrific problem dealt with an ugly problem: by flat out engaging in victim-blaming!
(part of comment deleted – conspiracy mongering)
https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/14/oberlin-college-pays-11-million-bakery-owner-students-smeared-racist/
Well, time will tell because if they do end up shutting down the ME clinic at Stanford, then this is going to look more suspicious to me. Yes, I agree that Dr. Montoya may be in the wrong, unfortunately it looks that way from what little we’re allowed to know right now, but what about the other 200 sexual abuses recorded at Stanford within the last year?
Are you telling me that all of the other professors have been behaving completely exemplary? Not one other professor has been fired at Stanford, not even for rape.
It damages our society in so many ways that universities and corporations are allowed to operate largely behind closed doors, without at least some of the “sunshine” (“the best disenfectant”)
that we demand from government. And as government itself is now retreating from public view and accountability, we can’t get ANYTHING done ( fraud or abuse detected, let alone laws changed and money budgeted) without hurdling these barriers.
I thank Cort and others for bringing us this info, (and I second the motion that you’ll edit out the exhausting and disheartening stuff from the one IP address so that others don’t have to wade through it). I agree with #Sally’s summary; to me, Montoya’s wording (the passive voice, the excuses, etc) ” couldn’t be more typical of the non-apology apology. I heard the news while preparing a GoFundMe in the hopes that I might be able to go to the clinic; it has erased one of my last hopes I’m
heartbroken for me, and others carried through long days by the same hope. And so angry. How dare he not only do what he did —and to colleagues in this endeavor—but endanger crucial work for a community counting on him. I hope he will have the decency to address us directly eventually, and in much more detail, or to allow a colleague to “leak” more information; we deserve at least that from him. I was tempted to urge more reporting by the ME/CFS community—BUT I do think we know enough to focus on going forward. First, let’s use our energy rations in doing all we can to keep the clinic alive and make it thrive. Second, the biggest revelation to me in this discussion is the scary news that the ME/CFS Community has a bad reputation for anger or antsgonism. n some ways, perhaps that’s natural: bitterness and despair of the scorned and ignored individual—writ large. And we are naturally splintered because our disease(s) are so varied in symptoms, etc. But, people!!!! RED ALERT! we have to be better than that! This seems to me a major priority that should be taken up as a project. Anyone who’s gone before a be rite capital or any other board seeking funds knows how crucial presentation is. We are getting so wonderfully more sophisticated in our advocacy marketing. We can’t f— it up when we actually get an audience. We should survey and identify language and behavior that are counterproductive, define the expectations and style of our audience with some detail, and develop a clarifying mission statement that can guide our conduct. We should suggest specific anguage and techniques that are most effective, and look at other groups that had to struggle for credibility for models. It would be great if some ME/CFS group (I can’t kerpnthem straight)!would take up this project, and even promulgate the results. But again, given our limited energy, it can be more informally crowd-sourced and edited and the results offered up to all who are interested. Just DOING It and raising chatter about it will help raise awareness. Cort, could you start a blog chat on this? And give us concrete examples of counterproductive behavior. (And if course let’s do it without pointing fingers.). Thank you!!!
All my solidarity to Dr Montoya
I am sure he will be able to demostrate his innocence.
Maybe he will and maybe he won’t; that is yet to be seen. However, it’s impossible to nurture concepts of Truth, Liberty and Justice, when figureheads aggressively discourage critical thinking and open-mindedness.
Driving the narrative with censorship – policing” of speech – and criticism towards those who question the authority figures and accusers here is dangerous and puts victims at further risk.
Statements such as “no cheese down that tunnel” in regards to Judy Mikovits’ targeted takedown ought to send chills down everyone’s spine and keep all Liberty-loving patriots awake at night.
Sorry that long post wasn’t better edited. I hope fellow readers will wade through to my proposal at the end.
I was having trouble with figure paragraphing. And I now see a lot of typos. Too tired now to correct — except for the most confusing (I think). I meant : … anyone who’s’s gone up before a VENTURE capital board—
Thanks
@Cort Johnson:
Would you please elaborate in what form David Nied (not Neid btw) contacted Healthrising and provided said statement attributed to Montoya?
The plain text PDF without a letterhead linked by The Stanford Daily in itself for example hardly seems like an official document.
Thanks for the correction. I am terrible at names. I even changed his name once and still got it wrong (lol).
Anyway he did it via email. If you think something funny is going on, though, don’t you think that, after hundreds of comments to a letter Dr. Montoya specifically addressed to the ME/CFS community, that if if was fake, at some point he would have said, Whoa! That’s not from me. (????)
What I think is not relevant, facts (apparently hard to come by in this matter) are.
Unlike many in this thread, I would rather not assume a lot but concentrate on ascertained information, of which we have seen too little.
Having emailed Nied myself before to confirm the origins of said PDF and so far not having received any reply I can’t say I’m too convinced of anything in this whole affair except for its undoubtedly being detrimental to pwME in general and some people curiously eager to rush judgment and move along.
(Spurious, conspiracy mongering comments deleted)
Nied has made his statement. He will not be replying to individual emails.
Montoya simply asked for another analysis – that happens ALL the time in research. These comments are way out of bounds. I apologize for doing a better policing job.
Yes, because having our comments policed and censored is highly important to us as medical refugees.
Montoya’s recent words at the NIH conference in April 2019 which possibly are of interest in a wider context:
“he talked about a document in the works from ME experts who have been in the field for decades. The IC Primer is a consensus guide created in 2012 by doctors who have diagnosed and/or treated more than 50,000 patients who have ME, have more than 500 years of clinical experience and approximately 500 years of teaching experience. Dr. Montoya went on to point out that a document created by doctors by consensus is considered evidence. He basically makes the case for adopting the International Consensus Primer. […]
During several of the presentations, the importance of stratifying patients for treatment and research was brought up. Dr. Montoya asked Ian Lipkin from Columbia University if they had separated out the severe patient group in the results from his latest study.
Dr. Lipkin responded, “no”. To which Dr. Montoya thanked him for his eloquent response. The exchange brought a laugh from the audience. Dr. Montoya followed up asking him to please separate out the severe patients in the results.”
source:
https://www.meadvocacy.org/advocating_for_me_icc_in_washington_dc
So for you even considering ME politics to possibly be relevant here is “spurious conspiracy-mongering” warranting open censorship, Cort?
That you would characterize comments pointing to information available on public record about Lipkin regarding both his role in ME research (i.e. finding retroviruses in 85% of Montoya’s samples in his infamous XMRV-study but deeming it irrelevant for no sensible reason) and history of sex misconduct accusations (by colleague Mady Honig) as “way out of bounds” is rather curious.
Provided to Health Rising
From Dr. Illianas
I was dismayed to learn about the recent news that Dr. José G. Montoya had been terminated because of violations of the code of conduct at Stanford University (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/06/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-scientist-fired-after-conduct-complaints-stanford-says) including sexual harassment.
In my capacity, as bye president, Currently as President (In charge of) and Professor of Family Medicine at the Universidad del Valle (Univalle) in Cali, Colombia, I’m expressing my unqualified support for Dr. José Gilberto Montoya’s character and integrity. I have known Dr. Montoya for almost forty years.
Dr. Montoya graduated from the Universidad del Valle in 1985 with honors. He did his Internal Medicine Residency at Tulane University and then his post-doctoral fellowship in Infectious Diseases at Stanford University where he rose to full Professor.
Despite that Dr. Montoya graduated from Univalle 34 years ago, he continues to visit Cali where he frequently lectures and pursues research projects with several institutions in Colombia. Of out his more than 150 publications, he has made possible to publish results of his collaborations in Toxoplasmosis and Dengue in Cali in prestigious international journals (see below).
However, above anything else, what strikes me the most from knowing Dr. Montoya over almost four decades is his humility (despite of all his accomplishments as a true scholar) and his capacity to connecting to what makes us humans. I’ve seen Dr. Montoya saluting with the same warmth and respect, a driver, maid, janitor, the Major of the City of Cali, the Minister of Education of Colombia, or me. He has the capacity to connect with others and exhibits a natural affection for those around him but never with the intention of invading, disrespecting, or abusing others. In my many interactions with him, my observations of his interactions with others, and the hundreds of others telling me stories of his successes, it has never been brought to my attention of him sexually harassing or behaving inappropriately with anyone.
2019-06-18-35642-I
As a female President (In charge of) of a major Public University in Colombia and Professor of Family Medicine, I know how important is to make sure that all members of the institution be respected and not harassed. Given how well I have known Dr. Montoya; I respectfully hope that the process that led to his termination be looked at again.
Regards,
LILIANA ARIAS – CASTILLO, M.D.
Academic Vice – President and Professor of Family Medicine at the Universidad del Valle (Univalle) in Cali, Colombia
June 19, 2019
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing on behalf of the group of 72 Colombian physicians listed below, medical school classmates and colleagues of Dr. Jose Gilberto Montoya. We wish to unwaveringly support Dr. Montoya in his defense against alleged personal misconduct at his workplace. To attest to the content of this letter, the members of this support group provide our personal contact information and (Colombian) national ID numbers.
We have known Dr. Montoya for the past 40 years, since our medical school days at the Universidad Del Valle, in Cali, Colombia. We have since maintained close contact with Dr. Montoya, including multiple encounters at individual and group meetings. Moreover, we have closely followed his outstanding professional career at Stanford, through which Dr. Montoya excelled and became a world authority in his field. Dr. Montoya, a role model for us all, is among the most pre-eminent Colombian medical doctors of his generation.
Above his professional qualities, we are first-hand witnesses of Dr. Montoya’s spotless personal and moral integrity, and his respect for other people. At all our personal and group encounters, his behavior has been without reproach. We look proudly at Dr. Montoya, a true leader and an inspiration to all those who know him closely. As a Faculty member for almost 3 decades, these human and professional attributes have surely been obvious to his students, subordinates and patients at Stanford. It is because of our close personal knowledge of Dr. Montoya, that we are shocked by the current allegations of misconduct made against him. We strongly believe that these accusations are most likely baseless and motivated by some misrepresentation or other unclear reasons, as they are simply not in line with the very well-established attributes of a man whom we have closely known and appreciated for most of our lives.
We respectfully request a meticulous, transparent re-evaluation of Dr. Montoya’s situation. At stake is the honor of a human being and Stanford’s prestigious reputation. We are convinced that such an honest, and thorough assessment, will demonstrate the senseless nature of the accusations against Dr. Montoya and restore his position as an honorable professional of impeccable character.
Sincerely,
William Bara-Jimenez, MD
ABPN & AANEM neurology diplomate
Bethesda, Maryland
(NAME, ID NUMBER, E-MAIL, PHONE NUMBER)
(Agobardo Arias, 16878476, Agobardo-arias@hotmail.com , 573155277082)
(Alberto Rosero, 12971898, albertolrosero@yahoo.com , 573206523868)
(Alejandro Agudelo, 16653121, agudeloayerbe2009@hotmail.com , 573155593485)
(Alfredo Paredes, 16618569, aparedesj@yahoo.com , 573104917585)
(Alvaro Arana, 16261026, Alvaroharana123@hotmail.com , 573206779626)
(Ana M. Navia, 31847102, milenavia@emcali.net.co , 573155779487)
(Antonio Quintero, 16651789, antonioequintero@gmail.com , 573155673412)
(Carlos A. Velasco, 16643480, carlos.velasco@correounivalle.edu.co ,
573105034020)
(Carlos H. Libreros, 16636044, carloslibrerosbertini@hotmail.com , 573006520665)
(Carlos A. Hernandez, 14884807, chadez2882@hotmail.com , 573155204900)
(Carlos E. Parra, 13448218, ceparram@yahoo.es , 573153812526)
(Carlos Rebolledo, 16664046, crebolledo06@gmail.com , 573117068643)
(Carlos Robledo, 16641873, carlosrobledo3@hotmail.com 573173314046)
(Carlos V. Rosales, 16624795, carviros@gmail.com , 573175172218)
(Carmen L. Valdes, 31893276, carvaldesb@hotmail.com , 573154954800)
(Cecilia Zamorano, 31877041, cecyzamorano@yahoo.com , 573136571966)
(Clara H. Torres, 38439469, clara.torres@imbanaco.com.co , 573155422779)
(David Astudillo, 14989177, buffeteastudillooviedo@hotmail.com , 573116284027)
(Dagoberto Giraldo, 16208472, aljuanfe@yahoo.es , 573144730822)
(Didier Camacho, 14882425, didieredocamacho@gmail.com , 573166953092)
(Diego Marin, 16673547, dialmarin@gmail.com , 573165227691)
(Edgar Lozano, 16354058, Edgarlozanocruz@gmail.com , 573154764047)
(Eduardo Gil, 16643984, egiltraumadeportivo@gmail.com , 5731556940390)
(Elizabeth Montoya, 31865326, emontoyad@hotmail.com , 573006921177)
(Erik Casanova, 16619999, ee1casanova@yahoo.ES , 34626497105)
(Ernesto Martinez, 16683875, emarbui@gmail.com , 573164484799)
(Fabian Osorio, 16265503, fabian.osoriofl@gmail.com , 573155591619)
(Fernando Jimenez, 16348081, ferjimenez@nacer.mx , 527773273037)
(Fabio Iglesias, 16448502, fastiglesias@yahoo.com.ar , 573104321150)
(Francisco Herran, 16649861, fherranf@hotmail.com , 14074847350)
(Genaro Velez, 16259685, genarovelez57@hotmail.com , 573117811591)
(Guillermo Ramirez, 16650001, guilleramirezar@hotmail.com , 573207308807)
(Gustavo Charria, 16269116, gcharria@yahoo.com , 13054690959)
(Harold Castano, 10481155, hcastano19@ou.edu , 14054965151)
(Hector F. Cruz, 14877862, hcruz78@hotmail.com , 573154627659)
(Hernan Volveras, 16639273, Hernanvolveras64@hotmail.com , 573152870463)
(Hernan Yepes, 16652957, heryep@hotmail.com , 573104287721)
(Humberto Ossa, 16600494, Ho.munoz@hotmail.com , 573152856633)
(Isabel Piazuelo, 31877663, isapiazuelo@gmail.com , 573154476380)
(Ivan Lopez, 16261989, ivanenriquelo@hotmail.com , 573192940491)
(Jairo Argote, 19529650, Jagora999@gmail.com , 573164256141)
(Jairo Silva, 16256524, jascadena@gmail.com , 573155339468)
(Javier F. Moreno, 16355653, javmorenom@hotmail.com , 573108395833)
(Jorge E. Enciso, 19217085, Jorgenriquees.go@hotmail.com , 57315573895)
(Jose R. Navarro, 16638238, jrnavarrov@unal.edu.co , 573153338374)
(Juan C. Montoya, 16665688, jcmontoyar@hotmail.com , 15703155975)
(Juan C. Mosquera, 10481391, juancmos5@gmail.com , 573163655676)
(Juan C. Rengifo, 16665687, jcrengifo@gmail.com , 573043848138)
(Juan G. Posada, 16661173, podocito@hotmail.com , 573175858940)
(Juan P. Martinez, 16628119, martinezjuanp@hotmail.com , 573154476380)
(Ligia I. Vigoya, 31899750, liveal63@hotmail.com , 573152705946)
(Luis E. Giron, 16622947, gironcho@gmail.com , 573214021745)
(Luis F. Tobon, 16655497, ltobon4@gmail.com , 14072705925)
(Luz A. Casas, 31864461, luzangelacasas@hotmail.com , 573175102120)
(Maria A. Tovar, 31520630, Ana.tovar@correounivalle.edu.co , 573104096531)
(Maria F. Marin, 31869848, mfmarinb@hotmail.com , 57315528035)
(Martha Y. Echeverry, 31892509, marthayelenae@hotmail.com , 573175006249)
(Maximiliano Parra, 19113086, parra.maximiliano@gmail.com , 573117616398)
(Milciades Garcia, 16270371, milgarcia000@gmail.com , 573217462214)
(Miled Gomez, 16606515, miledgomez@hotmail.com , 573006822061)
(Nelson Ramirez, 12113786, nelsonramirez59@yahoo.com , 573153231245)
(Nelson Silva, 16644032, nrsilvah@hotmail.com , 573183365077)
(Nestor F. Collazos, 16632689, medicollazos@gmail.com , 56997467362)
(Noel Florez, 16666016, noelflorez@yahoo.com , 573162871194)
(Oscar Londono, 16625933, oscarlondono@gmail.com , 573128812761)
(Pedro P. Perea, 16642876, Pedroperea02@yahoo.com , 573015544377)
(Raul F. Argote, 16625427, dermargote@hotmail.com , 573165243506)
(Roxana Cobo, 31841044, rcobo@imbanaco.com.co , 573155598146)
(William Escobar, 10534091, wescobar@imbanaco.com.co , 573155766685)
(William Bara-Jimenez, 16265508, baraw@bethesdaneuro.com , 13015207142)
(William Jaramillo, 16351300, williamjaramillo2009@hotmail.com , 573165219575)
(Yordy E. Ulloa, 16668982, yordyulloa@hotmail.com , 573102528173)
Dr. Montoya is getting a lot of support from his colleagues. Here is another long letter of support – this time from South American and American colleagues including some women.
(I apologize for the formatting: it was copied from a PDF sent to Health Rising.
June 25, 2019
To whom it may concern,
Re: Jose G. Montoya, MD
We, undersigned hereby former trainees and close colleagues in the United States, Latin America, and Europe, and members of the Colombian Association of Infectious
Diseases, want to express the highest level of support for Dr. Jose G. Montoya, whom we have known in his role of mentor, research collaborator, and personal friend.
We have been blessed to know Professor Montoya for 29 years, since his appointment in the faculty of the Division of Infectious Diseases, at Stanford University. In this capacity, we have closely worked alongside Dr. Montoya in clinical, research, and academic roles. Dr. Montoya is a role model for all of us in several aspects of our lives: as a master clinician in infectious diseases, as a renowned clinical investigator, and as a mentor.
Above all, we recognize Dr. Montoya as a peerless clinician. His humility, deep
understanding of medicine and the human condition, and his ability to empathize with patients when they are at their most vulnerable, are second to none.
Remarkably, Dr. Montoya’s expertise in toxoplasmosis has been crafted for several decades within his role of Medical Director of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation-
Toxoplasma Serology Laboratory (PAMF-TSL), positioning him as a worldwide expert in
the field of human toxoplasmosis. He has led several research projects aimed to mitigate the impact of this neglected disease in the US and the developing world. We have admired Dr. Montoya’s generosity and ceaseless pursuit of excellence in every aspect of his life.
As trainees and close colleagues, we are exceedingly familiar with his professional behavior and can say, without a doubt, that we have only observed and experienced Dr. Montoya uphold the highest standards known to our shared profession. Several of us here signing this letter, are women who work in several roles within academic medicine. We have never observed or experienced any lapse in his professional judgment. We have only known his warmth, kindness, and humble intelligence. We are extremely proud to have been mentored either or worked alongside Dr. Montoya and his guidance has been instrumental in helping us navigate the strains of academic medicine.
It is by emulating him that we have achieved professional success ourselves. We have seen Dr. Montoya’s devotion to patient care, dedication to research, and generosity as a teacher. Dr. Montoya’s contributions to the study of Infectious Diseases, Toxoplasmosis, and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome are unparalleled. The field of Infectious Diseases and academic medicine will suffer a great loss without Dr. Montoya’s continued contributions and his teaching print.
Please accept our unconditional support for Dr. Montoya based on our direct professional and personal relationship with him during which time we have never witnessed a breach in his conduct. It is our expectation that a thorough and detailed investigation will enable justice and truth to be reached.
Sincerely,
List of Signatories:
Dr. Christelle Pomares, MD, PhD
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice
Laboratoire de Parasitologie-Mycologie
Université de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, Inserm U
1065
Hôpital de l’ARCHET
151, route de Saint Antoine de Ginestière
CS 23079 06202 Nice Cedex 3 France
Tel : 00.33.(0)4.92.03.62.54
Fax : 00.33.(0)4.92.03.62.58
pomares.c@chu-nice.fr
Professor Pomares has requested to include the following text in the body of this letter:
“I’m Christelle Pomares, Associate Professor in France working in a teaching hospital in Nice France. I spent two years as visiting scholar at Stanford University and Palo Alto Medical Foundation-Toxoplasma Serology Laboratory (PAMF-TSL), working with Pr.Montoya. In no situation have I ever felt any sexual misconduct, assault, or harassment.
Jose is an extremely great professor and researcher. He has been my mentor and friend since my stay in his team. I’ve been truly appreciate working at his side and in any situation never felt any trouble as a woman working with him. I give him my full truly support.
Sincerely,
Dr. Christelle Pomares, MD, PhD
You can call me at : +33607169564 if needed”
Carlos A Gomez MD
Assistant Professor
Division of Infectious Diseases
University of Utah School of Medicine
Salt Lake City, UT 84132
Phone (801) 213-0894
Infectious Diseases Fellow at Stanford
Research scholar at PAMF-TSL (2014-2018)
carlos.gomez@hsc.utah.edu
Pr Daniel AJZENBERG
Dr PhD –HDR
Neuroépidémiologie Tropicale,
Laboratoire de Parasitologie-Mycologie,
Faculté de Médecine,
Université de Limoges,
Limoges, 87025, France
Tél : 33 (0)5 55 05 61 60 (sec.)
Fax : 33 (0)5 55 05 62 27
ajz@unilim.fr
Pr Pierre Marty
Professeur des Universités-Praticien Hospitalier
Vice-Doyen de la Faculté de Médecine pour les Relations Internationales
Président Sous-section 45-02
Conseil National des Universités
Parasitologie-Mycologie
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice
Faculté de Médecine, Université de Nice-Sophia
Antipolis, Inserm U 1065
Hôpital de l’Archet
151, route de Saint Antoine de Ginestière
CS 23079 06202 Nice Cedex 3 France
Tel: 33 (0) 4 92 03 62 54, Fax: 33 (0) 4 92 03 62 58
E-mail: marty.p@chu-nice.fr
Despina Contopoulos-Ioannidis, MD
Clinical Associate Professor
Department of Pediatrics, Division of Infectious Diseases
Stanford University School of Medicine
300 Pasteur Drive, Room G312
Stanford, CA, 94305
email: dcontop@stanford.edu
Andrés F. Henao-Martínez, MD.
Assistant Professor.
Infectious Diseases Division.
University of Colorado School of Medicine.
Director — Travel clinic, University of Colorado Hospital
12700 E. 19th Avenue. Mail Stop B168.
Aurora, CO 80045-2560.
Off: (720)-848-0820.
Pg: (303)-266-3554
Fax:(720)-848-0191
andres.henaomartinez@ucdenver.edu
Kiran Gajurel MD
Attending Physician
Division of Infectious Diseases
Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health , NC, USA
ID fellow at Stanford (2013-2015)
gajurelk@gmail.com
Reshika Dhakal, MD, MPH
Oncology Research Specialist
Levine Cancer Institute
Charlotte, NC, USA
Visiting scholar at PAMF-TSL, 2014-2015
rdhakal200@yahoo.com
Jorge Alberto Cortes, MD
Associate professor of Medicine
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Visiting fellow (2000-2001)
Visiting professor (2014) at Stanford University
Phone +57 315-3514013
Bogota, Colombia
jacortesl@unal.edu.co
Ernesto Martínez Buitrago, MD
Infectious Diseases Specialist and Professor,
Hospital Universitario del Valle
Universidad del Valle
Cali, Colombia
cel: +57 3164484799
eMail: emarbui@gmail.com
Carlos Arturo Alvarez-Moreno. MD MSc PHD FIDSA
Past President, Colombian Infectious Diseases Association (ACIN)
Professor of Medicine at Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine
Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Bogota, Colombia
caalvarezmo@unal.edu.co
Prof. François Peyron
Professor Université de Lyon
Hospices Civils de Lyon
(Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lyon) |
CHU Lyon · Laboratoire de Parasitologie Digestive
et Cutanées Sérologies Parasitaires Toxoplasmose
Lyon, France
francois.peyron@chu-lyon.fr
Sandra L. Valderrama, MD
Vice President,
Colombian Infectious Diseases Association (ACIN)
Infectious Diseases Unit Chief,
Hospital Universitario San Ignacio.
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
Bogota, Colombia
sandra.valderrama@gmail.com
Federico Perez, MD, MS
Associate Professor of Medicine,
Case Western Reserve University,
Program Director, Infectious Diseases fellowship,
University Hospitals,
Cleveland, Ohio
Federico.Perez@va.gov
Sonia Isabel Cuervo Maldonado, MD, MSc
Infectious Diseases Specialist
Professor of Medicine,
Facultad de Medicina
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Grupo de Infectología Instituto Nacional de
Cancerología – ESE
Leader research group GREICAH.
Bogota, Colombia
sicuervom@unal.edu.co
Pr Marie-Laure Dardé
National Reference Center for Toxoplasmosis – France
Parasitology Department
Universitary Hospital
Limoges – France
e-mail: marie-laure.darde@unilim.fr
Pablo Andrés Moncada MD
Infectious Diseases and Internal Medicine specialist
Program Director, Internal Medicine residency training program
Icesi/CES
Fundacion Valle del Lili
Cali, Colombia
drpmoncada@gmail.com
Pr Isabelle Villena
Head of Laboratory of Parasitology-Mycology, Hospital Reims,
Adjoint to Chief of Pôle Biology, Reims
Head of Team EA ESCAPE in University of Reims Champagne -Ardenne,
Head of National Reference Centre on Toxoplasmosis in France
Laboratoire de Parasitologie-Mycologie, EA 7510, UFR Médecine
51 rue Cognacq Jay, 51095 Reims Cedex
Tel : 33 (0) 3 26 78 42 20 – Fax : 33 (0) 3 26 78 73 28
Email: ivillena@chu-reims.fr
Florence ROBERT-GANGNEUX
Professeur des Universités – Praticien Hospitalier
Service de Parasitologie-Mycologie
Faculté de Médecine et Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes
INSERM U1085-IRSET, Université Rennes 1
RENNES, France
tel. +33 (0)2.23.23.44.99 ou +33 (0)2.99.28.42.68
florence.robert-gangneux@univ-rennes1.fr
Luis Gabriel Uribe, MD, FACP
MEDICAL DIRECTOR:
Kenner and La Place Dialysis Centers.
EX CHIEF OF STAFF:
Kindred Hospital,
St Charles General Hospital and
Ochsner Kenner Hospital
Manager Partner Kidney Consultants.
200 W. Esplanade Suite 103
Phone 504-464-8711
Fax:504-464-8711
Luribe1@cox.net
Dr. Liliana Arias-Castillo, MD
Academic Vice-President
President in Charge,
Universidad del Valle
Cali-Colombia
rector@correounivalle.edu.co
-Attached, please find official statement from presidency office, Universidad del Valle.
Robert W. Shafer, MD
Professor of Medicine and by courtesy Pathology
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine
Stanford University
Stanford, CA, USA
rshafer@stanford.edu
Pr Martine Wallon, MD, MPH, PhD
Head of the Parasitology and Medical Mycology Department
Lyon Teaching Hospital – University Claude Bernard Lyon 1
Tel. 00 33 4 72 00 37 44/00 33 4 72 07 11 44
martine.wallon@chu-lyon.fr
Daniel Shin MD
Infectiosu Diseases
Palo Alto Medical Foundation
Palo Alto Foundation Medical Group
Sutter Medical Network
Mountain View, CA 94040
650-934-7599
Daniel_Shin@elcaminohealth.org
Sebastian Ochoa MD
Clinical Fellow,
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH
Bethesda, MD
sebastian8a2000@gmail.com
Peter M. Small, M.D.
Founding Director,
Stony Brook Global Health Institute
Stony Brook, NY 11794
pspetersmall@gmail.com
Fernando Rosso, MD, MSc.
Infectious Diseases Service . Department of Medicine.
Director. Clinical Research Center .
Fundación Valle de Lili
Cali – Colombia
Associated Clinical Professor
Faculty of Health Sciences
Universidad Icesi
Cali – Colombia
frosso07@gmail.com
Prof. Valeria Meroni
Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Terapia Medica
Università di Pavia
Sc Microbiologia e Virologia
Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo
Vle Taramelli 5 Pavia 27100, Italy
Tel: 0382502631
V.Meroni@smatteo.pv.it
Carlos Humberto Saavedra Trujillo MD
Associate Professor
Post-graduate Infectious Diseases Coordinator
School of Medicine
Universidad Nacional De Colombia
Bogota, Colombia
chsaavedrat@unal.edu.co
Luis Guillermo Uribe R. MD
Internist and Infectious Diseases specialist
Chief of Infectious Diseases,
Hospital Internacional de Colombia –
Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia
Bucaramanga, Colombia
Visiting fellow at Stanford ICHS
PAMF-TSL September 2012- May 2013
luisuribe@fcv.org
Pío López, MD
Department of Pediatrics Chief
Program Director, Pediatrics Infectious Diseases
Universidad Del Valle, Colombia
President, Colombian Infectious Diseases Association (ACIN)
Vicepresident, LatinAmerica Society of Pediatrics Infectious Diseases
Director, Center for Pediatrics Infectious Diseases Studies
Cali, Colombia
pio.lopez@ceiponline.org
Jorge Enrique Gomez Marin, MD, PhD
Professor,
Centre for Biomedical Research CIBM
Vicepresident of Research
Universidad del Quindio
Armenia, Colombia
gepamol2@uniquindio.edu.co
Jon E. Lutz, M.D., F.A.C.P.,
Summit medical group Orgeon
1501 NE Medical Center Dr, Bend, OR 97701
JLutz@BMCTOTALCARE.COM
Dr. Montoya has treated my niece and nephew for CFS for almost 15 years now. My niece was one of the first. She is one of the very lucky sufferers who was cured as a result. My nephew is, or was, still being treated.
I live in Palo Alto and have followed Dr. Montoya’s relatively high-profile career for thirty years. He treated AIDs patients in the eighties, transplant patients and toxoplasmosis patients in the nineties and for the last 15 years, Chronic Fatigue patients. He was a Professor, has taught in the medical school for thirty years, won awards every year for teaching [voted by the students by the way] and has been an attending at Stanford hospital for the same amount of time, working with hundreds of students, women and men, and patients. In all this time, NOT ONE HINT of any misbehavior. Nothing. Why would someone accuse him now? I absolutely believe he has been falsely accused.
Dr. Montoya is a warm and caring physician – we all know that and have experienced the benefits that come with such a doctor treating us or our loved ones. He is brilliant. He is the one who has lead the charge, fought the establishment and the very first of his stature to BELIEVE CFS patients. He is Latin. His roots are modest. These behaviors and his background challenge the traditional medical system – is this the true reason he has been punished?
To suggest that the CFS clinic will continue on in the same manner without him is magical thinking. The genius, the future-oriented ideas and research, the fearless pushing forward and courage to champion
the under-served despite underlying critics of CFS patients is now gone.
This is yet another blow to the CFS community. We can only hope and pray that Dr. Montoya perseveres and continues his work, maintains his commitment to the eradication of this dreadful disease and that we can find him for continued treatment, whether that is at Stanford or someplace else.
I miss Dr. Montoya so much!!! I have seen dozens of doctors regarding my health struggles and hands down,
DR. MONTOYA IS THE BEST!!! In all the years of being his care, I felt safe, I felt heard, and I knew he genuinely was fighting for me even when I was too weak to fight for myself. Does anyone know where he is practicing now? I will travel to wherever he is because this man is truly a gift to the medical field. The clinic now has Dr. Bonilla and Dr. Bonilla talks right over his patients, you don’t feel heard or cared for at all. Please Dr. Montoya, wherever you are and if you are reading this, please contact me or leave me information so I can contact your new office for I desperately need your care! You’re the best and your patients miss you greatly! Love and blessings to you always ???