Columbia University’s recently released report on former OB/GYN Robert Hadden’s sexual abuse of patients for decades inside its medical system confirms what survivors have said for years: patients reported abuse, complaints were buried, and leadership allowed Hadden to continue practicing. Columbia failed.
But, the most revealing part is what the report refuses to examine. The “mandate did not extend to events that occurred after Hadden stopped seeing patients in 2012.” That is not a glitch. It means the investigation was deliberately narrowed to avoid the most dangerous questions: not just how Hadden was enabled for so long, but who coordinated the cover-up after he was exposed.
New York Attorney General Letitia James’ recently revealed investigation into Columbia’s handling of allegations against Hadden must not make the same mistake. What followed after Hadden’s arrest is not a separate story — it is the story. A scandal of this magnitude warrants a full reckoning.
The old playbook here is simple: power protects power. The institution admits just enough to survive, offers a few overdue departures, hires lawyers to validate it, and hopes we move on. But, the public is tired of institutions and their leaders failing upward while the community pays the price.
Take for example, Mary D’Alton and Lee Goldman, two complicit administrators who should have been removed years ago. Instead, like former President Lee Bollinger before them, they appear to have now been allowed to retreat quietly and comfortably following the report’s release with their reputations intact.
The report explains how quickly word of Hadden’s 2012 arrest reached the highest levels, including Bollinger and the top lawyers, executives, and boards of both Columbia and NewYork-Presbyterian. Columbia is also described in the report as a “deeply hierarchical culture.” If that is true, then a real investigation must look all the way to the top.
Who knew what when? Who directed the legal strategy to intimidate and silence survivors? Who approved efforts to suppress information from the public and media? Who decided not to notify more than 6,500 former patients for years? Who kept key figures in place long after their failures were obvious? Who narrowed the scope of the investigation? Where are the missing files?
Columbia did not merely compound the moral horror of Hadden’s abuse, it deepened the university’s legal exposure, amplified reputational damage, and helped produce a financial catastrophe.
The university has now paid more than $1 billion to more than 1,000 survivors; with the true liability cost being exponentially higher. These consequences are not abstract: faculty, teaching assistants, nurses, and other workers are now fighting over rights and resources in the shadow of an institution weakened by leadership’s failures.
There is another uncomfortable truth here. Columbia has shown a disturbing pattern of comfort around sexual abusers and their enablers. The recently released Epstein files, which include ties to Columbia administrators after Epstein was already a convicted sex offender, only reinforce the perception of a culture at the top that is far too willing to accommodate powerful men accused or convicted of predation.
The public deserves a full accounting on Hadden. That requires looking hard at people with status and deep institutional ties. That means widening the scope. Following the money. Subpoenaing records. Investigating the board. Examining the legal and public-relations strategy.
James has the authority to finish the job Columbia refused to do. She should not accept platitudes, public apologies, or carefully staged retirements in place of real accountability. We won’t either.
Hoechstetter and Yang were patients of Hadden in the Columbia University medical system.