Who is “Dr. X”? Part 2

Who is “Dr. X”? Part 2 (Click here for Part 1)

In Part One of this investigation into “Dr. X,” I included a hyperlink to the “Verified Complaint (Complaint)”—the actual lawsuit—filed by ex-Planned Parenthood of Arizona (PPA) director Mayra Rodriguez. I will delve into more detail about this shocking document in this second portion. The allegations against Dr. X are found beginning on page 4 of the Verified Complaint, paragraphs 24 through 33.

This Complaint detail Mayra’s duties as Planned Parenthood’s “Health Care Administrator” (paragraph 22); one of these was working with PPA clinicians and receiving from them reports about patients and possible problems and complications from their care at PP.

Paragraph 26 says:  “By early-to-mid August 2017, Ms. Rodriguez noticed a trend of PPA clinician written reports detailing patients who were suffering from substantial post-abortion surgical complications or problems such as extensive bleeding and painful cramping.  The reports, authored in order for PPA to comply with A.R.S. § 36-2162, also documented several patients suffering from perforated uteruses which had been diagnosed by emergency room physicians throughout the metro area.  Ms. Rodriguez determined that a single PPA doctor, fictitiously named herein as “Dr. X,” had performed the abortion surgeries on each of these patients who had reported the foregoing substantial post-abortion surgery complications or problems.” (Emphasis mine.)

It has been established from Part 1 this investigation of Dr. X that the true identity of this particular physician is Dr. William Richardson. This lone abortionist, coming in position two for the number of abortions performed in Arizona, was responsible for nearly 50% of all statewide complications. Yet as seen in the paragraph above, Mayra reveals that Dr. Richardson was responsible for all of the “substantial post-abortion surgery complications or problems” of a certain number of patients who were harmed by his acts of shoddy medical practice.

For the remainder of this second portion of my investigation of Richardson, I will take the liberty of substituting his name, “Dr. Richardson,” whenever I encounter “Dr. X” when quoting from the Verified Complaint.

Paragraph 27: “Based on her years of experience at PPA, Ms. Rodriguez was concerned that PPA patients that underwent abortion surgery with Dr. Richardson were suffering far more substantial post-abortion surgery complications and problems than the patients who underwent abortion surgery by or with the other PPA physicians.  Ms. Rodriguez was concerned about the substantial health, safety, and welfare of the inevitable future PPA patients who would be surgically treated by Dr. Richardson.” (Emphasis mine.)

Without question, if these allegations concerning the unprofessional—even inept and dangerous—quality of care provided at the hands of Dr. Richardson with female abortion patients are true, it is incumbent on those who exercise oversight of physicians to immediately open a thorough and meticulous inquiry to determine whether or not these allegations are accurate.

Unfortunately, upon information and belief, no such investigations have been initiated. In fact, according to paragraphs 28, Mayra was aware that Dr. Richardson and Mayra’s immediate supervisor, Ms. Ibarra, “…had been friends and close workers for the past two decades, and, as such, Ms. Ibarra had a reputation for being fiercely protective of Dr. Richardson…” Due to this close and protective relationship between Ibarra and Richardson, Mayra “… was reluctant to report her concerns, complaints and warnings about Dr. Richardson to her immediate supervisor, Ms. Ibarra…”

Mayra opted instead to take her concerns to Ms. Wright, a Lead Clinician at PPA. Ms. Wright “…expressed her agreement with the stated concerns, complaints, and warnings and she told Ms. Rodriguez that ‘they [PPA upper management] all know what he [Dr. Richardson] does but nobody wants to do anything about it…” (paragraph 29) (emphasis mine.)

Planned Parenthood has been embroiled in one unending series of controversies for decades, and this allegation made by Ms. Wright, that the upper management of PPA has full knowledge of the myriad and serious potentially criminal conduct of one of their staff physicians yet intentionally decides to do nothing, represents another new low for the abortion giant.

(As pointed out in Part One of this investigation, I am unaware of any criminal legal action currently or in the past being taken against Dr. Richardson for these alleged allegations of medical misconduct. All Americans are protected by the legal standard of “innocent until proven guilty,”; thus, Richardson must be seen as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This noted, I also point out my First Amendment right to publish my opinion on any matter, as I do in these investigations concerning PP and Richardson.)