50 Women Claim Gynecologist Molested Them

State officials seeking to revoke the medical license of gynecologist Ivan C. Namihas sought to accelerate the process Tuesday by drafting a request to immediately shut down his practice, while police explored possible criminal action against him.

By midday Tuesday, more than 50 women--some reportedly choking back sobs--had called the California Medical Board claiming that Namihas had molested them sexually as far back as the late 1960s, said Kathleen Schmidt, a senior investigator for the medical board in Santa Ana.

“This is the worst case of its kind in the history of the state,” assuming all the women’s allegations prove true, said Schmidt.

Janie Cordray, a board spokeswoman in Sacramento, said investigators were assembling evidence to bolster their bid “to shut him down.”

Barry Ladendorf, who supervises the attorney general’s Health Quality Enforcement Unit, said his deputy hopes to seek a temporary license suspension from an administrative law judge in San Diego by the end of the week. Such an order would prevent Namihas from seeing patients while both sides await the outcome of the license revocation proceedings.

Schmidt said she was working as fast as possible Tuesday interviewing the alleged victims and preparing sworn declarations outlining their claims.

One of the women who complained to the medical board also filed a criminal complaint against Namihas with the Tustin Police Department. Investigators there said they plan to meet this week with Deputy Dist. Atty. Jan C. Sturla, head of the district attorney’s sexual assault unit, to determine whether criminal charges against Namihas are warranted.

Sturla said allegations such as those against Namihas are difficult to prosecute criminally because they do not suit the criteria for most sexual offenses. But someone who touched a woman sexually against her will could be prosecuted for misdemeanor sexual battery, Sturla said. The charge carries a maximum punishment of six months in jail and a $2,000 fine.

Sexual battery is subject to a one-year statute of limitations, Sturla said, precluding prosecutions of incidents older than that.

It is easier to prove professional misconduct that would strip a doctor of his license--such as having sex with a patient, regardless of the woman’s consent--than it is to prove he committed a criminal offense, Ladendorf said.

Namihas and his lawyer did not return phone calls from The Times.

The doctor, who has been licensed to practice medicine for 30 years, was charged with gross negligence and sexual misconduct by the medical board in December based on the allegations of five women, describing incidents between 1968 and 1988.

Once those charges became public, however, they prompted an outpouring of similar allegations, Schmidt said.

The first woman to file a complaint against Namihas with the medical board, Roberta Ward, said Tuesday the flood of complaints from other women has made her feel “vindicated” after suffering a decade of pain. She contended that Namihas touched her sexually during an examination in 1981.

Schmidt and Ladendorf, however, said the board had little choice but to wait so long to pursue charges, because it only recently assembled sufficient evidence.

“You can’t just go into court and say to a judge, ‘Hey, this woman says this, so you’d better suspend this doctor’s license,’ ” Ladendorf said. “It’s not that easy.”

Schmidt added: “With a gynecologist it’s even harder to prove these sexual-touching things, because the doctor can say, ‘Oh, I was just examining her and she misinterpreted me.’ ”