{"id":261541,"date":"2026-02-09T08:29:48","date_gmt":"2026-02-09T15:29:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/montanafreepress.org\/?p=261541"},"modified":"2026-02-09T14:32:42","modified_gmt":"2026-02-09T21:32:42","slug":"inside-the-systemic-sexual-abuse-reporting-failure-at-one-montana-hospital","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/montanafreepress.org\/2026\/02\/09\/inside-the-systemic-sexual-abuse-reporting-failure-at-one-montana-hospital\/","title":{"rendered":"Inside the \u2018systemic\u2019 sexual abuse reporting failure at a Helena hospital"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Editor\u2019s note: This article contains references to sexual assault and harassment. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the spring of 2024, a cancer patient at St. Peter\u2019s Health in Helena, the longtime local hospital, made a disturbing report to one of the staffers in the oncology unit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The patient, a 51-year-old woman, said that a male nurse had \u201ctouched and fondled her breasts,\u201d according to the recollection of the staffer whom she told. The patient also insisted that she did not want that male nurse to care for her anymore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a publicly available report detailing the incident, federal hospital inspectors said the employee then shared the patient\u2019s allegation with an on-duty supervising nurse. Two other staff members later told inspectors that they were also informed about the patient\u2019s claim the day after it was made. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But according to the 2025 investigation by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, the federal agency that serves as a watchdog for patient abuse and neglect, none of the four staff members who learned of the patient\u2019s grievance documented the complaint in the hospital\u2019s official system for such allegations. That inaction allowed the report to go uninvestigated for several months, and for the staff member accused of assault to remain employed until much later that year. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

READ THE REPORT<\/a>Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n

In October of 2024, another patient came forward to accuse that same staff member of assaulting her a year earlier, when she was hospitalized in the intensive care unit. That allegation, reiterated in the federal inspection, matches the felony charge and licensing investigation against former St. Peter\u2019s nurse Aaron Gams<\/a>. Gams has pleaded not guilty to the charge, although a recent court filing shows he is scheduled to change his plea later this month.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the federal inspection, investigators said the lack of official documentation of the complaints against the male nurse was part of a \u201csystemic\u201d failure in how St. Peter\u2019s handled multiple reports of sexual abuse by two staff members in 2023 and 2024. The report indicates that, during its unannounced inspection prompted by an anonymous complaint, the federal agency identified a dozen staffers at St. Peter\u2019s who had failed, on more than a dozen occasions, to file required reports about hospital employees allegedly sexually harassing and abusing patients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThese failures created an unsafe environment and had the potential to place all hospital patients at risk for sexual abuse,\u201d the inspection stated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Investigators concluded that the \u201dseverity and cumulative effect\u201d of the hospital\u2019s reporting failures and other violations in patient safety protocol justified putting St. Peter\u2019s in \u201cimmediate jeopardy\u201d status \u2014 a designation that could have resulted in the hospital losing its ability to bill the public health insurance programs Medicaid and Medicare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Within a week of that finding, inspectors said, St. Peter\u2019s submitted a plan for correcting how it tracks and investigates reports of sexual abuse. Once that plan was accepted by investigators on Jan. 28, 2025, the hospital\u2019s immediate jeopardy status was lifted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Excerpts of a 2025 inspection into St. Peter’s Health in Helena by federal investigators with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a watchdog agency that reviews patient abuse and neglect reports. Credit:<\/span> Lauren Miller \/ Montana Free Press, CatchLight Local\/Report for America<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A nonprofit hospital, St. Peter\u2019s is one of the largest employers in Helena, with roughly 1,800 employees. It serves around 100,000 residents from Lewis and Clark and surrounding counties, according to the hospital\u2019s website. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A spokesperson for the hospital declined to answer specific questions from Montana Free Press about the findings of the federal investigation and the hospital\u2019s response. The hospital also declined several requests from MTFP to interview hospital CEO Wade Johnson or other administration officials about the report. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a series of statements, St. Peter\u2019s spokesperson Jacquelyn Tescher said the hospital has changed its protocols in light of the federal investigation’s findings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAll of us at St. Peter\u2019s Health are deeply troubled and saddened by what happened. The actions of these individuals do not reflect the care and commitment we have for our patients, families, and this community,\u201d Tescher wrote in an email to MTFP. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The hospital did not provide specific dates or details about its internal actions, but Tescher said that the repeated lack of documentation flagged by federal investigators didn\u2019t necessarily mean that hospital staff had been unresponsive to patient complaints. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhile our staff took immediate action and began an internal review on each concern, the initial concern and actions taken were not always immediately documented. In some instances, documentation occurred after a concern was founded and corrective actions had been implemented,\u201d Tescher said. \u201c… We have learned through this process that [the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] requires more timely reporting and specific documentation mechanisms be used in addition to the protocols we have in place. We have adopted those updated protocols, and our entire team has been trained to use them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although the Helena hospital appeared to avoid long-term repercussions from federal officials for its mishandling of sexual abuse complaints, the findings of the investigation raise new questions about the internal safety protocols at St. Peter\u2019s after officials there said publicly that one of its longtime cancer physicians, Dr. Thomas Weiner, had harmed patients<\/a>. St. Peter\u2019s has faced several lawsuits over alleged negligence and malpractice related to Weiner\u2019s care since it fired him in 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tescher did not directly answer a question about how the hospital intends to rebuild the community\u2019s trust in the wake of the federal investigation. As part of the hospital\u2019s statement, she said St. Peter\u2019s takes \u201cvery seriously\u201d the privilege and responsibility of caring for patients\u2019 health and well-being. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSt. Peter\u2019s is committed to acting with integrity as we continue to rebuild trust and provide the great care and experience our community deserves,\u201d Tescher wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018STAFF MEMBER A\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

The accused male staff member, along with all other employees, is anonymous in the federal investigation and only referred to by a letter of the alphabet. Inspectors labeled the male nurse as \u201cstaff member A.\u201d But the details of that employee\u2019s actions and the timeline of his related disciplinary proceedings, as laid out by federal health inspectors, match those included in a felony criminal complaint<\/a> and a state licensing investigation against Gams, the former St. Peter\u2019s nurse the hospital fired in October 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federal investigators recounted that, roughly six months after the oncology patient complained about staff member A, another patient contacted a different hospital employee to report that staff member A had abused her when she was incapacitated in the intensive care unit in 2023. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The patient had, for nearly a year, believed her recollections were a figment of her imagination, according to the report she later filed with local law enforcement<\/a>. That perception changed when the nurse texted her in late September 2024, introduced himself as Gams and asked to talk about what had happened, according to charging documents. The patient concluded that Gams had obtained her personal cellphone number from her medical records, a breach of patient privacy laws. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Oct. 8, 2024, less than two weeks after she first heard from Gams, federal investigators said the patient reported the text messages and her recollections from the ICU to a hospital employee. But health inspectors found that multiple staff members who learned of the incident \u2014 either directly from the patient or from colleagues \u2014 did not immediately complete an official report about the woman\u2019s account. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inspectors noted that another higher-up staff member was informed about the second patient\u2019s accusation the following day, a Wednesday, but that staff member A was not placed on administrative leave until Friday, two days later. At that time, inspectors noted that \u201cno incident report was created,\u201d an omission that they found violated the hospital\u2019s own internal protocols.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Investigators said that someone in the facility eventually entered the incident into the hospital\u2019s official reporting system in mid-November, more than a month after the former ICU patient first reached out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asked by MTFP to respond to the federal findings about documentation failures related to staff member A, Tescher pushed back, describing the hospital as having taken assertive action in the case that was also reported to local law enforcement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cUpon receiving the report of this nurse\u2019s behavior towards a patient, they never worked another shift, and they never cared for another patient. St. Peter\u2019s Health followed its reporting procedures and fully cooperated with law enforcement in its investigation,\u201d she said in an emailed statement. \u201cTo be clear, when an allegation is reported, we take immediate action to protect patients and work with appropriate authorities on next steps.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the federal inspection indicates that the first known complaint against staff member A, originating from the since-deceased oncology patient, did not reach the upper levels of the hospital\u2019s administration until January 2025, roughly nine months after it was originally made. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two days after MTFP reported<\/a> on Gams\u2019 arrest on Dec. 31, 2024, one of the staff members who had been told about the oncology patient\u2019s sexual abuse complaint shared the account with a higher-level hospital employee, according to internal emails reviewed by federal investigators and their interviews with staff.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cReview of a facility email from staff member C to staff member W, dated 1\/2\/25 at 4:15 p.m., confirmed that allegations of sexual abuse made by patient #2 against staff member A around April 2024, were not communicated to staff member W until approximately nine months after the allegations were made,\u201d the inspection said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Excerpts of a 2025 inspection into St. Peter’s Health in Helena by federal investigators with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a watchdog agency that reviews patient abuse and neglect reports. Credit:<\/span> Lauren Miller \/ Montana Free Press, CatchLight Local\/Report for America<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Tescher did not respond to specific questions about the multi-month delay in the report about the oncology patient\u2019s complaint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hospital officials did take action after Gams was placed on administrative leave in October 2024 to determine whether he had improperly accessed other patients\u2019 medical records. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The hospital\u2019s internal audit confirmed that he had. In total, the federal inspection said, St. Peter\u2019s staff found that staff member A had inappropriately accessed \u201caround a dozen\u201d patient records. In an interview with investigators, one upper administration official said there appeared to be \u201ca pattern of staff member A accessing former ICU patients\u2019 charts after they discharged from the facility.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The federal report did not say whether Gams used those records to contact other patients, but it noted that the administrator said that the hospital had not reached out to the affected patients \u201cto inquire with the patients or their representative if they had concerns regarding their care.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tescher did not respond to MTFP\u2019s questions about whether the hospital had notified those patients about its findings since the federal inspection ended. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gams\u2019 attorney did not respond to a list of questions from MTFP about the findings of the federal investigators, including the account about another patient who apparently accused Gams of sexual assault in 2024. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBecause this is an ongoing case, I am unable to comment on your questions,\u201d Gams\u2019 Helena attorney, Misty Gaubatz, wrote in an email, noting that her client had pleaded not guilty to a single pending charge, which prosecutors brought based on the account of the former ICU patient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ACCUSATIONS AGAINST A SECOND NURSE <\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Federal investigators detailed allegations against another staff member accused of harassing and inappropriately touching patients. The report identified her only as \u201cstaff member AAA,\u201d describing her as a female nurse who worked on the Behavioral Health Unit. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the inspection, the nurse was accused of sexually harassing and abusing a male patient who had been hospitalized in the psychiatric unit in June 2024. The patient informed other staff members in writing that he had \u201cexperienced sexual harassment\/abuse\u201d from the nurse during his hospitalization, including, in the patient\u2019s words, \u201cinappropriate touching in private areas kissing hugging trying to have a relationship.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As part of that complaint, the patient described his confusion about the woman\u2019s treatment of him, adding that he wasn\u2019t \u201cin the right frame of mind\u201d and that it took him \u201ca few days to realize that this behavior is very inappropriate and extremely unprofessional.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Excerpts of a 2025 inspection into St. Peter’s Health in Helena by federal investigators with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a watchdog agency that reviews patient abuse and neglect reports. Credit:<\/span> Lauren Miller \/ Montana Free Press, CatchLight Local\/Report for America<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Within days of the patient delivering his written grievance, at least five staff members read or learned about his allegations against staff member AAA, federal investigators found. None of them documented the patient\u2019s complaint in an official incident report, the inspection said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the employees, when passing the patient\u2019s allegation onto her supervising director, shared other misgivings about the female nurse\u2019s behavior. Among those concerns, that colleague recounted hearing staff member AAA describe another patient as \u201ccute\u201d and that she had given that patient \u201ca backrub.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federal inspectors spoke to the male patient who originally reported staff member AAA. In that conversation, the former patient \u201cstated he had been struggling every day since the sexual abuse.\u201d He also told investigators that he was \u201cconcerned that staff member AAA had sexually assaulted other patients on the unit.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In response to questions about the nurse\u2019s current employment status with St. Peter\u2019s, Tescher said that staff member AAA had been a contracted nurse who was \u201cimmediately\u201d removed from patient care after the hospital administration learned of the allegations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cUpon receiving a report of this safety concern, the contracted nurse was immediately removed from patient care. Their employer was contacted and we sent a report to the nurse licensing board. They never worked at St. Peter\u2019s Health again,\u201d Tescher wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tescher said that the abuse allegations against the female nurse came only from one patient, despite the federal inspection report referencing another staff member\u2019s observations about her conduct toward another patient. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tescher did not respond to an additional question from MTFP regarding when the hospital became aware of the report against the contracted nurse and when she was removed from caring for patients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

REBUILDING TRUST<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Throughout the report, federal inspectors reiterated the systemic shortfalls in the hospital\u2019s process for documenting and investigating sexual assault complaints. Those failures, investigators said, had put all patients at risk of inappropriate treatment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In June of last year, hospital officials updated the federal agency on its progress in a report on St. Peter\u2019s letterhead. The hospital said it had increased training about how to handle reports of sexual abuse, including featuring \u201ceducational content\u201d in its internal newsroom about the importance of \u201cresponding to, reporting, and investigating abuse and neglect.\u201d The hospital also said it had launched in-person training for its employees about \u201cpatient safety culture,\u201d facilitated by CEO Johnson. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That same month, federal officials completed a follow-up inspection about the hospital\u2019s compliance with requirements about documenting abuse reports. Investigators found that St. Peter\u2019s \u201chad corrected the areas of deficient practice.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an email earlier this month, a spokesperson for the federal agency confirmed to MTFP that St. Peter\u2019s is in compliance with its policies and regulations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c[T]here have been no additional surveys at the facility since,\u201d the spokesperson said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tescher, the hospital spokesperson, said the hospital\u2019s disciplinary status had been removed because of the significant improvement in its protocols.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe immediate jeopardy classification was lifted because St. Peter\u2019s implemented a robust reporting\/documentation training program for all 1,800 caregivers. This focus on reporting\/documentation training continues for all employees annually and new employees during their onboarding process,\u201d Tescher wrote. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cPatients and families trust us to provide quality, safe and compassionate care each time they come to St. Peter\u2019s,\u201d she continued. \u201cWe are committed to earning our community\u2019s trust each day by learning and continually improving in everything we do.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>
\n

In-depth, independent reporting on the stories impacting your community from reporters who know your town.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/span><\/span>\n\n\n

\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tLATEST STORIES<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

Poll week: How Montanans feel about sales tax, immigration and state officials<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t

We polled Montana voters on an array of issues. Results will roll out the week of March 2.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

Where does eastern Montana start? Montanans disagree<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t

Montana is in many ways a land of two halves: a western Montana of snow-capped mountains and national forests joined in political unity with an eastern Montana of wide-open plains and flatland agriculture. It’s a time-honored divide: peaks versus plains, Missoula versus Miles City, Flathead versus Fort Peck lakes. But where exactly is the dividing line?<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

Montana voters overwhelmingly view cost as a major mental health care hurdle<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t

According to a Montana Free Press-Eagleton Poll, conducted in late 2025 and early 2026, 67% of respondents cited “cost of services” as a major problem when it comes to accessing care. A smaller share, 42%, cited the stigma associated with receiving care as a major problem, while 47% said the same about the travel distance necessary to access services.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t