Litcius/Paper detail

Artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making: Rethinking liability

Helen Smith, Kit Fotheringham

2020Medical Law International75 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

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.

Topics & Concepts

LiabilityDutyActuarial scienceContext (archaeology)Duty of careCompensation (psychology)BusinessPoolingPersonal injuryLiability insuranceMedicineInsurance policyLaw and economicsLawPsychologyEconomicsPolitical scienceAccountingComputer scienceSocial psychologyArtificial intelligenceBiologyPaleontologyMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesBiomedical Ethics and RegulationEthics in Clinical Research