Artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making: Rethinking liability
Author(s) -
Smith Helen,
Fotheringham Kit
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
medical law international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.185
H-Index - 11
eISSN - 2047-9441
pISSN - 0968-5332
DOI - 10.1177/0968533220945766
Subject(s) - liability , duty , actuarial science , context (archaeology) , duty of care , compensation (psychology) , business , pooling , personal injury , liability insurance , medicine , insurance policy , law and economics , law , psychology , economics , political science , accounting , computer science , social psychology , artificial intelligence , biology , paleontology
This article theorises, within the context of the law of England and Wales, the potential outcomes in negligence claims against clinicians and software development companies (SDCs) by patients injured due to AI system (AIS) use with human clinical supervision. Currently, a clinician will likely shoulder liability via a negligence claim for allowing defects in an AIS’s outputs to reach patients. We question if this is ‘fair, just and reasonable’ to clinical users: we argue that a duty of care to patients ought to be recognised on the part of SDCs as well as clinicians. As an alternative to negligence claims, we propose ‘risk pooling’ which utilises insurance. Here, a fairer construct of shared responsibility for AIS use could be created between the clinician and the SDC; thus, allowing a rapid mechanism of compensation to injured patients via insurance.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom