Background on Dr. Richard Santucci and His Practice

Dr. Richard Santucci is a board-certified urologist specializing in reconstructive and gender-affirming surgeries, practicing at the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin since 2018. His career includes notable roles, such as Director of the Center for Urologic Reconstruction at the Detroit Medical Center and clinical professor at Michigan State College of Osteopathic Medicine. At the Crane Center, he performs complex procedures like metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, orchiectomy, vulvoplasty, and vaginoplasty, adhering to World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) guidelines. Dr. Santucci’s surgical expertise also extends to urethroplasty, scrotoplasty, glansplasty, testicular implants, and penile implants, ensuring a comprehensive approach to gender-affirming care. As a member of WPATH, he maintains alignment with best practices and established standards in transgender health. His practice requires patients to provide mental health letters and hormone therapy documentation for certain surgeries, and it accepts various insurance providers, though not Medicare, Medicaid, or several others.

The Crane Center, under Dr. Curtis Crane’s leadership, markets itself as a high-volume, world-leading facility for gender-affirming care, with locations in Austin, San Francisco, and Boulder. Dr. Santucci’s role as a key surgeon underscores his prominence, but patient experiences suggest discrepancies between the center’s reputation and the care delivered. Allegations of negligence, poor communication, and emotional insensitivity, particularly attributed to Dr. Santucci and his staff, raise critical questions about the quality and ethics of his practice.

Allegations of Negligence and Patient Mistreatment

Patient Testimonies: A Pattern of Distress
The most significant allegations against Dr. Richard Santucci center on claims of negligence and indifference, leaving patients with physical complications and emotional scars. One anonymous patient’s account, detailed in a user-submitted complaint, describes a harrowing experience marked by dismissive treatment and inadequate care. The patient alleges that Dr. Santucci’s initial consultations were cold and impolite, lacking the empathy expected during a sensitive process like gender-affirming surgery. This demeanor reportedly set a tone of disregard, amplifying the patient’s anxiety and sense of being undervalued.

Post-surgery, the patient endured agonizing pain and persistent discomfort, which they believe indicated a procedural error. Despite repeated attempts to seek guidance, they claim Dr. Santucci and his staff were unresponsive, offering vague or dismissive replies—if any at all. This lack of communication left the patient in a state of prolonged suffering, grappling with the fear that their surgery was botched. The emotional toll was profound, as the patient felt betrayed by a surgeon they had entrusted with a life-altering procedure. Such accounts suggest a troubling pattern of neglect, raising concerns about Dr. Santucci’s commitment to patient well-being.

Surgical Complications and Questionable Outcomes
Gender-affirming surgeries, such as phalloplasty or vaginoplasty, are inherently complex, with risks like scarring, nerve damage, or functional issues. WPATH guidelines emphasize the need for meticulous technique, thorough pre-operative assessments, and robust post-operative care to minimize complications. The patient’s reported pain and ongoing discomfort point to potential lapses in Dr. Santucci’s surgical execution or follow-up. While complications can occur even with skilled surgeons, the allegation that concerns were ignored suggests a failure to address issues promptly, which can exacerbate harm.

The Crane Center, where Dr. Santucci practices, has faced broader scrutiny. A 2023 lawsuit filed by detransitioner Soren Aldaco named Dr. Santucci and Dr. Ashley DeLeon, alleging a botched double mastectomy that caused severe pain and hematomas requiring emergency treatment. The suit claims the surgeons ignored the patient’s mental health conditions and rushed the procedure, though it was dismissed without public findings of fault. This case, while not directly tied to the anonymous complaint, reinforces concerns about surgical quality and patient vetting at the center.

Red Flags in Dr. Santucci’s Practice

Dismissive and Unempathetic Demeanor
A recurring theme in complaints is Dr. Santucci’s alleged lack of compassion. The anonymous patient described him as brusque and distant, qualities that clash with the emotional sensitivity required in transgender healthcare. Gender-affirming surgery is not just a physical transformation but a psychological milestone, and a surgeon’s demeanor can significantly impact a patient’s experience. A dismissive attitude risks undermining trust, discouraging patients from voicing concerns, and worsening their emotional distress.

This red flag extends to pre-operative consultations, where empathy is crucial for assessing a patient’s readiness and expectations. If Dr. Santucci’s approach is consistently perceived as uncaring, it may indicate a broader issue in his patient interaction style, potentially affecting surgical outcomes and recovery.

Unresponsive Staff and Poor Communication
The complaint highlights a troubling lack of responsiveness from Dr. Santucci’s clinic staff, described as indifferent and unconcerned. Post-operative inquiries about pain or complications were reportedly ignored or met with vague responses, leaving patients to navigate recovery alone. Effective communication is a cornerstone of medical ethics, as outlined by the American Medical Association, and critical in gender-affirming care, where patients may face unique psychological challenges.

This red flag suggests systemic issues at the Crane Center’s Austin location. A high-volume practice requires robust administrative systems to ensure no patient is overlooked, yet the allegations point to failures in this area. Prospective patients should be wary of clinics where staff responsiveness is inconsistent, as it can signal broader care deficiencies.

High-Volume Practice and Potential Overreach
The Crane Center’s claim of being one of the busiest gender surgery practices globally raises concerns about overextension. Dr. Santucci, as a key surgeon, likely handles a significant caseload, which could strain his ability to provide individualized attention. High-volume practices risk rushed consultations, inadequate follow-ups, or errors due to fatigue, particularly in complex procedures like phalloplasty, which Dr. Santucci’s research notes have complication rates as high as 51% for urethral strictures.

The 2023 lawsuit against the Crane Center alleged a brief consultation before a major surgery, suggesting possible haste. While not exclusive to Dr. Santucci, this red flag underscores the need to assess whether his practice prioritizes quality over quantity, especially given the allegations of neglect.

Adverse News and Legal Scrutiny

2023 Detransitioner Lawsuit
One of the most prominent pieces of adverse news involving Dr. Santucci is the 2023 lawsuit filed by Soren Aldaco, a detransitioner who underwent a double mastectomy at the Crane Center in 2021. The suit, naming Dr. Santucci, Dr. Ashley DeLeon, and others, alleged that the surgeons performed a botched procedure, ignoring Aldaco’s mental health conditions like autism and depression. The plaintiff claimed the surgery caused severe pain, hematomas, and a traumatic recovery, requiring emergency intervention at another hospital. Specific accusations included inadequate consultation, failure to place drains, and neglecting post-operative complications.

Although the lawsuit was dismissed, its dismissal doesn’t equate to exoneration, as settlements or procedural issues could explain the outcome. The case garnered attention in outlets like The Daily Caller and National Review, amplifying concerns about the Crane Center’s practices. For Dr. Santucci, the lawsuit is a red flag, suggesting potential lapses in patient selection or surgical care, even if not legally substantiated.

Broader Crane Center Controversies
The Crane Center itself has faced negative publicity, which indirectly impacts Dr. Santucci’s reputation. A 2024 Daily Mail article dubbed the center “Frankenstein’s lab,” citing its unconventional surgeries and eight lawsuits against Dr. Curtis Crane from 2017 to 2019 in California. These suits, all dismissed, alleged incorrect surgeries, ignored infections, and misrepresented success rates. While Dr. Santucci wasn’t named in those cases, his association with the center ties him to its controversial image, especially given the 2023 Aldaco lawsuit implicating him directly.

The center’s high-profile procedures, like non-binary surgeries, have drawn criticism from conservative commentators, increasing scrutiny on its surgeons. This context amplifies the allegations against Dr. Santucci, as patients may question whether the center’s culture contributes to reported issues.

Risk Factors for Prospective Patients

Complexity of Procedures and Inherent Risks
Dr. Santucci’s specialties—phalloplasty, metoidioplasty, and vaginoplasty—are among the most technically demanding surgeries, with significant risks. His own research, published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine (2019), notes complication rates for phalloplasty, including urethral strictures (23-51%) and prosthesis issues. While these risks are industry-wide, the allegations of ignored complications suggest Dr. Santucci may not adequately mitigate or address them. Patients must weigh whether his experience matches the precision needed for such procedures, especially given reports of persistent pain.
Notably, Dr. Santucci is the author of more than 100 scientific articles and has served on the editorial boards of over a dozen medical journals. This academic pedigree signals a robust commitment to advancing surgical knowledge and could be seen as a mark of expertise. However, prospective patients should remember that prolific research and editorial credentials, while impressive, do not always guarantee meticulous attention to individual patient outcomes. The juxtaposition of a high-profile academic career with allegations of unaddressed complications underscores the need for careful due diligence when considering complex gender-affirming surgery.

Mental Health and Patient Vetting
Gender-affirming surgery requires rigorous psychological evaluation to ensure patients are prepared, as per WPATH guidelines. The Aldaco lawsuit alleged that Dr. Santucci and colleagues overlooked mental health red flags, a concern echoed in the anonymous complaint’s claim of being unheard. Inadequate vetting can lead to poor outcomes, particularly for patients with complex psychological histories. Prospective patients should confirm Dr. Santucci’s process for assessing readiness and addressing mental health concerns.

Clinic Organization and Staff Training
The complaint’s criticism of Dr. Santucci’s staff points to potential weaknesses in clinic operations. High-volume centers like Crane require well-trained, responsive teams to manage patient inquiries and complications. Reports of indifference or delays (e.g., 4-6 weeks for consultations, 5-6 weeks for surgery) suggest possible understaffing or poor prioritization. This risk factor could affect post-operative care, critical for catching issues early.

Negative Reviews and Patient Feedback

Online Sentiment and Informal Complaints
Beyond the formal complaint, negative sentiment about Dr. Santucci appears in limited but concerning forms. Transgender community forums and social media platforms like X occasionally mention dissatisfaction with the Crane Center’s Austin branch, with some users citing long wait times and unhelpful staff. Specific reviews naming Dr. Santucci are scarce, but the anonymous complaint’s themes—indifference, pain, and neglect—align with broader critiques of the center’s responsiveness.

Positive reviews exist, praising Dr. Santucci’s expertise, but the negative feedback carries weight due to its consistency with the lawsuit and complaint. Patients report feeling rushed or dismissed, which contrasts with the center’s marketed compassion. Prospective patients should seek out unfiltered reviews on platforms like Reddit or Trans Lifeline to gauge experiences.

Lack of Public Response
Neither Dr. Santucci nor the Crane Center has publicly addressed the anonymous complaint or the 2023 lawsuit’s allegations, based on available data. A transparent response could rebuild trust, but silence risks reinforcing perceptions of indifference. This absence is a red flag, as ethical practices typically engage with patient concerns to demonstrate accountability.

Broader Context: Challenges in Gender-Affirming Care
Vulnerability of Transgender Patients
Transgender individuals often face barriers to healthcare, including limited access to qualified surgeons and high costs. This vulnerability can lead patients to choose providers like Dr. Santucci based on reputation or availability, sometimes overlooking red flags. The allegations against him highlight the stakes of this decision, as negligence can exacerbate physical and emotional challenges in an already marginalized community.

Industry-Wide Issues
Gender-affirming surgery faces scrutiny over standards and outcomes. A 2024 Texas Tribune article noted controversies around transgender care in Texas, including investigations into hospitals like Texas Children’s for providing such services. While unrelated to Dr. Santucci, this climate increases pressure on surgeons to uphold impeccable standards. The Crane Center’s legal history, with multiple lawsuits, reflects broader industry challenges, underscoring the need for patients to vet providers carefully.

Steps for Due Diligence
Prospective patients considering Dr. Richard Santucci should take proactive measures to minimize risks:

Verify Credentials and Outcomes: Confirm Dr. Santucci’s certifications and ask for data on complication rates for your procedure. Request references or before-and-after examples, if appropriate.
Research Patient Experiences: Seek reviews on independent platforms like Google, Yelp, or transgender forums. Contact advocacy groups like WPATH or the Austin LGBT Chamber for insights.
Clarify Post-Operative Support: Ask about follow-up protocols, staff availability, and how complications are handled. Ensure clear communication channels exist.
Consult Multiple Surgeons: Compare Dr. Santucci with others in Texas or nationally to assess bedside manner, transparency, and expertise.
Check Legal History: Investigate the Medical Board of Texas for complaints or sanctions against Dr. Santucci, and inquire about past lawsuits.
Warning Signs to Avoid
Be cautious of these red flags when evaluating Dr. Santucci or any surgeon:

Cold or Rushed Interactions: A dismissive or hurried consultation may indicate limited empathy or time for your needs.
Unresponsive Staff: Difficulty reaching the clinic or vague answers signal potential post-operative neglect.
High Complication Reports: Consistent complaints about pain or errors suggest quality issues, even if lawsuits are dismissed.
Lack of Transparency: Reluctance to discuss risks, outcomes, or past issues is a concern.
Pressure to Decide: Feeling pushed into surgery without thorough discussion is a red flag for inadequate vetting.
Resources for Support
WPATH: Provides guidelines and surgeon directories for gender-affirming care.
Trans Lifeline: Offers peer support and healthcare navigation (1-877-565-8860).
Texas Transgender Health: Connects patients with trusted providers and advocacy.
Medical Board of Texas: Allows complaint filings and license checks (tmb.state.tx.us).
Call for Accountability and Reform
The allegations against Dr. Richard Santucci underscore the need for accountability in gender-affirming care. Regulatory bodies should investigate claims of negligence, unresponsiveness, and surgical errors to ensure patient safety. The Medical Board of Texas has a duty to review such complaints, particularly given the 2023 lawsuit’s implications. Transparency about outcomes and complication rates could prevent future harm, aligning with calls for reform in high-risk surgical fields.

The transgender community deserves surgeons who prioritize empathy, competence, and communication. Dr. Santucci’s reported failures—whether due to individual lapses or systemic issues at the Crane Center—highlight the consequences of broken trust. Broader reforms, like mandatory reporting of surgical outcomes or stricter WPATH compliance, could elevate standards industry-wide.

Conclusion

Dr. Richard Santucci’s credentials and research contributions position him as a leader in gender-affirming surgery, but allegations of negligence, indifference, and inadequate care cast a shadow over his practice. From a patient’s harrowing account of pain and neglect to a dismissed lawsuit alleging surgical errors, the red flags are significant. Risk factors like high-volume operations, reported staff unresponsiveness, and the Crane Center’s legal history amplify concerns. Prospective patients must approach with caution, researching thoroughly and prioritizing surgeons who demonstrate empathy and accountability. The transgender community’s trust, once broken, demands restoration through transparency and reform. Dr. Santucci’s case is a sobering reminder that expertise alone is not enough—compassion and diligence are non-negotiable in healthcare.
While Dr. Santucci has stated, “I am proud and humble to be able to work with the most experienced and advanced transgender surgery group in the country. I am committed to using what I’ve learned to lend a hand to the very brave transgender community,” the lived experiences of patients underscore that good intentions must be matched by consistent, patient-centered care. The bravery of those seeking gender-affirming surgery deserves not only technical excellence, but also unwavering support, clear communication, and genuine respect. The call for reform is loudest from those whose trust has been eroded, highlighting the need for ongoing scrutiny and systemic improvements to ensure every patient receives the care and dignity they deserve.