Who is liable for AI mistakes
The lead Ruth’s take |
This week, the American Medical Association pushed back on the idea that physicians should assume all liability for AI used in health care.
In an issue brief, the physician group, a major lobbying force in Washington, suggests that if doctors are going to be liable for damage incurred from AI recommendations, then they have to be put in a position where they can meaningfully assess the outputs. For example, if AI deprioritizes a patient during triage, a physician who only sees a list of patients should not be liable for not elevating a patient who needed priority.
The document also outlined a need to define expectations for reasonable reliance on AI tools. Essentially, the document suggests that regulators or industry groups need to outline the circumstances under which a physician can rely on AI without assuming full liability. If an AI tool has been authorized to complete a certain task, should a physician be able to trust that tool?
The paper also says that developers of AI tools should assume some liability for their products even after deployment and so should the deployers, ie. health systems. Without these liability agreements in place, AMA says that physicians should be able to refuse AI products presumably without having to worry about losing their jobs.
The organization says that clarifying liability should ensure patients have to have a path to accountability. Though patients have to be aware of when AI is being used.
The takeaway: As AI becomes more pervasive in medicine, discerning who is liable for harm is going to become even more pressing. As my conversation with Federation of State Medical Boards CEO Hank Chaudhry highlights, who gets in trouble when AI goes wrong is going to be a top issue to solve next year and developers are under pressure to take on some of that responsibility. |
—Ruth
`Upcoming Sessions
Live conversations with the people shaping healthcare.
AMA with Doximity CEO Jeff Tangney
Join Doximity CEO Jeff Tangney for a live Q&A on where clinicians are finding value with AI, how Doximity has evolved, and building a company from zero to IPO.
Is It Finally the Moment for Alternative Health Plans?
Register Here Employers are under growing pressure to control healthcare costs while improving access, outcomes, and the member experience. That has renewed
Type 2 Diabetes & Cardiometabolic Care: Wearables, AI & GLP-1s
Register Here The rise of wearables, GLP-1s, and AI is reshaping treatment for Type 2 diabetes, weight loss, and metabolic disease.
Verifying AI in Medicine: Is Healthcare AI Actually Ready for Deployment?
Is AI ready for real-world clinical care? Dr. Zak Kohane and Protege’s Engy Ziedan debate what it takes to safely trust AI in diagnosis and treatment, from benchmark performance and clinical evidence to whether we’re holding AI to a higher standard than humans.
Why Are Hospitals Hiring Chief AI Officers?
As AI moves from pilots into day-to-day healthcare operations, health systems are having to decide who should actually own the
Where are AI Agents Actually Working in Healthcare, and Why?
While the healthcare industry remains locked in a high-level debate over the theoretical potential of artificial intelligence, a select group of
Top Employers Share What Healthcare Startups Need to Know in 2026
As enterprise health purchasers face volatile medical cost trends and tightening operational margins, the standard vendor pitch of "improved clinical efficiency&
Peptide Therapy: Where Do We Go From Here?
Watch the full webinar Peptide therapies have moved from niche biohacking circles into mainstream medicine, reshaping conversations around weight management, metabolic health,
Not everyone can access the top 1% of physicians. Will AI change that?
Historically, top-tier medical expertise was limited by wealth and geography. As AI reshapes healthcare delivery, a vital question emerges: can it democratize intelligence to give everyone access to the caliber of care typically reserved for the top 1%?