The sentiment “there were lessons learned” can only go so far when you are referring to the serious accusations of sexual misconduct against a UCLA faculty member.

James Heaps, a former UCLA gynecologist and faculty member in the David Geffen School of Medicine from 1989 to 2018, has faced more than 500 sexual misconduct lawsuits.

According to the Los Angeles Times, former University of California President Janet Napolitano said “there were lessons learned” in the case when she originally vowed to assess how UCLA handled allegations of sexual misconduct against Heaps in 2019.

However, after being convicted on three counts of sexual battery by fraud and two counts of sexual exploitation of an unconscious victim in 2022, he will now face a retrial.

“It’s pretty disappointing,” said Alex Newman, a fourth-year political science student. “With all the evidence stacked against him and the amount of people that filed claims against him, to see all of that go to waste, especially during a time where we highly encourage women to speak out, and to watch that be ignored is pretty disappointing.”

The appeals court overturned Heaps’ initial conviction due to the court’s foreman expressing concerns that one juror experienced a potential language barrier and thus could not carry out their duties fully.

Heaps was initially sentenced to 11 years in state prison in 2023.

While in criminal law the burden of proof is on the prosecution, UCLA also has a responsibility to consistently be asking the right questions and providing up-to-date answers to its community.

Rahil Menon, a second-year economics student said UCLA needs to do more to ensure students are informed about the overturned conviction of James Heaps.

Especially given the recent developments in Heaps’ trial, the university should share updates on how it maintains patient safety in a healthcare setting on a regular basis through its revised policies.

There must be more reassurance to everyone connected to the university that this is not something UCLA condones and that they are doing everything in their power to stop this from happening again, Newman added.

Numerous women involved in the lawsuit alleged that their complaints went ignored by the university for decades and that UCLA intentionally concealed the abuse before beginning to investigate Heaps in late 2017.

The UC has, however, distributed just under $700 million in settlements for cases against Heaps – the largest settlement payout ever recorded related to sexual assault involving a public university.

At the heart of the litigation in this case are allegations that UCLA disregarded countless detailed complaints of abuse for decades.

Everyone deserves to feel respected and have autonomy over their body when being treated by a physician. Safety from an alleged sexual predator is the bare minimum for a sensitive medical exam. And the university failed to provide that for hundreds of patients.

The suits claim that UCLA allowed Heaps – who was at one time reportedly the UC’s highest-paid physician – to return to practice in 2018 despite an ongoing internal investigation in which the plaintiffs’ lawyers claimed that UCLA investigators had gathered extensive evidence against Heaps.

In March 2019, UCLA initiated an independent review of Heaps’ actions and a report resulting from the review was made available in 2020. The report listed information on changes that were to be made to UCLA Health to protect patients from any form of sexual misconduct.

Yet, recent news about a retrial has once again left the UCLA community unsettled. Past, current and future patients of UCLA Health deserve an update.

Gloria Reyes-Mitchell, a first year psychobiology student, said she has not received any updates from the university regarding Heaps and safeguarding.

“I feel wronged by the university because they’re not doing anything and they’re not addressing it properly,” Reyes-Mitchell added.

How has UCLA continued to strengthen its policies against sexual misconduct in a healthcare setting? Have the implementations from the initial report in 2020 been proven effective? How does UCLA continue to monitor the safety of its patients and address sexual misconduct allegations in a timely manner?

Newman said that the lack of knowledge that students have about the developments in the Heaps’ trial seems intentional by the university.

UCLA cannot hide behind the fact that a review was conducted and that it changed some policies over five years ago. Instead, it must provide consistent and up-to-date information, assuring the UCLA community that similar allegations of this magnitude and multitude will never happen again.

Hosting forums where students could talk, ask questions and speak on the situation more confidently is something that the university could be doing for the community right now, Menon said.

A spokesperson from UCLA did not respond in time to a request for comment and a UCLA Health spokesperson declined to comment about the case.

Sexual misconduct allegations of any sort deserve to be investigated to the fullest extent. But, efforts required to maintain patient safety in a vulnerable healthcare setting do not end there.

There is no excuse for UCLA ignoring hundreds of allegations about the sexual misconduct alleged of James Heaps.

The questions that should have been asked after allegations against Heaps were first reported never were.

Thus, at the very least, UCLA can provide some answers about how its updated healthcare sexual misconduct policies and practices are working continuously to keep its students, patients and community members safe.