Analysis of approaches to determining legal liability for the actions of artificial intelligence in the medical field: the experience of the United States and Russia.

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

This article introduces a comparative analysis of existing approaches to determining the liability of artificial intelligence in the context of public medical relations between the United States and Russia. As part of the comparative analysis, the basic problems in the field of transparency in the decision-making of artificial intelligence were identified, theoretical and practical situations for the use of artificial intelligence in the medical field were considered, and possible compensatory legal measures were proposed to ensure the safe integration of artificial intelligence into the healthcare sector in Russia. The subject of the study is the formalization of artificial intelligence actions in legal relations between a doctor and a patient. The object of the study is regulatory documents, recommendations and other documents regulating the use of artificial intelligence for the purposes of medical legal relations in Russia and the United States, judicial practice, academic publications and analytical reports on the issues under study. The research methodology integrates a complex of modern philosophical, general scientific, special scientific methods of cognition, including dialectical, systemic, structural-functional, hermeneutical, comparative legal, formal legal (dogmatic), etc. Within the framework of this study, special emphasis is laid on the implementation of a comparative legal study of the phenomenon of the autonomy of artificial intelligence involved in legal relations between a doctor and a patient, followed by the identification of potential scenarios for regulating responsibility for AI actions. The measures proposed as a result of the study can be applied in the legislative activities and their implementation by relevant authorities that are in charge of the integration of artificial intelligence into the sphere of public relations in Russia, including the healthcare sector.

References

  1. Обсерватория ИИ ОЭСР (каталогизированная информация о регулировании ИИ в различных странах мира): [сайт]. — URL: https://oecd.ai/en/ (дата обращения: 13.05.2023).
  2. AD HOC COMMITTEE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (CAHAI): [сайт]. — URL: https://rm.coe.int/cahai-2020-23-final-eng-feasibility-study-/1680a0c6da (дата обращения: 13.05.2023).
  3. Первый проект рекомендации об этических аспектах искусственного интеллекта ЮНЕСКО: [сайт]. — URL: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373434_rus (дата обращения: 13.05.2023).
  4. AI's impact raises legal, ethical questions Report on Tokyo Forum 2019 Parallel Session “Digital Revolution” : [сайт]. — URL: https://www.u-tokyo.ac.jp/focus/en/features/z0508_00159.html (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  5. Executive Order 13859 of February 11, 2019 Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence: [сайт]. — URL: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/14/2019-02544/maintaining-american-leadership-in-artificial-intelligence (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  6. Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications: [сайт]. — URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-06.pdf (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  7. List of FDA Guidance Documents with Digital Health Content: [сайт]. — URL: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/digital-health-center-excellence/guidances-digital-health-content (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  8. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA): [сайт]. — URL: https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/publications/topic/hipaa.html (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  9. HITECH Act Enforcement Interim Final Rule: [сайт]. — URL:https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/hitech-act-enforcement-interim-final-rule/index.html(дата обращения 01.05.2023)
  10. Chung J. What should we do about artificial intelligence in health care? //NYSBA Health Law Journal. – 2017. – Т. 22. – №. 3.
  11. Knight W. The dark secret at the heart of al //Technology Review. – 2017. – Т. 120. – №. 3. – С. 54-61.
  12. Price W., Nicholson I. I. Describing Black-Box Medicine //BUJ Sci. & Tech. L. – 2015. – Т. 21. – С. 347.
  13. Scherer M. U. Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies //Harv. JL & Tech. – 2015. – Т. 29. – С. 353.
  14. Matheny M. et al. Artificial intelligence in health care: The hope, the hype, the promise, the peril //Washington, DC: National Academy of Medicine. – 2019.
  15. Chung J., Zink A. Hey Watson-Can I Sue You for Malpractice-Examining the Liability of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine //Asia Pacific J. Health L. & Ethics. – 2017. – Т. 11. – С. 51.
  16. Danny Tobey, Explainability: Where AI and Liability Meet, DLA PIPER: [сайт]. — URL: https://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2019/02/explainability-where-ai-and-liability-meet (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  17. Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm § 17 (Am. Law. Inst. 2010): [сайт]. — URL: https://www.ali.org/publications/show/torts-liability-physical-and-emotional-harm/ (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  18. Greenberg M. D. Medical malpractice and new devices: defining an elusive standard of care //Health Matrix. – 2009. – Т.19. – С. 423.
  19. Price I. I., Nicholson W. Medical malpractice and black-box medicine //Big Data, Health Law, and Bioethics (Cambridge University Press, 2018), U of Michigan Public Law Research Paper. – 2017. – №. 536.
  20. Allain J. S. From Jeopardy! to jaundice: the medical liability implications of Dr. Watson and other artificial intelligence systems //Louisiana Law Review. – 2013. – Т. 73. – №. 4. – С. 7.
  21. Restatement of the Law (3d) of Torts—Apportionment of Liability, § 13 (2000): [сайт]. — URL: https://www.ali.org/publications/show/torts-apportionment-liability/ (дата обращения 13.05.2023)
  22. Vladeck D. C. Machines without principals: liability rules and artificial intelligence //Wash. L. Rev. – 2014. – Т. 89. – С. 117.
  23. Chinen M. A. The co-evolution of autonomous machines and legal responsibility //Va. JL & Tech. – 2016. – Т. 20. – С. 338.
  24. Sawicki N. N. Modernized informed consent: Expanding the boundaries of materiality //U. Ill. L. Rev. – 2016. – С. 821.
  25. Cohen I. G. Informed consent and medical artificial intelligence: What to tell the patient? //Geo. LJ. – 2019. – Т. 108. – С. 1425.
  26. Липчанская М. А., Заметина Т. В. Социальные права граждан в условиях использования искусственного интеллекта: правовые основы и пробелы законодательного регулирования в России //Журнал российского права. – 2020. – №. 11. – С. 78-96.
  27. Отставнова Е. А. Реализация конституционного права на охрану здоровья в условиях развития искусственного интеллекта //apni. ru Редакционная коллегия. – 2020. – С. 36.
  28. Понкин И. В. Медицинское право в условиях цифровизации //Бизнес, менеджмент и право. – 2021. – №. 1. – С. 22-25.
  29. Варюшин М. С. Правовой режим технологий искусственного интеллекта, применяемых в телемедицине //Журнал телемедицины и электронного здравоохранения. – 2021. – Т. 7. – №. 2. – С. 18-22.
  30. Ковелина Т. А., Собянин А. В., Марухно В. М. К ВОПРОСУ О ПРАВОВОМ РЕГУЛИРОВАНИИ ПРИМЕНЕНИЯ ИСКУССТВЕННОГО ИНТЕЛЛЕКТА В МЕДИЦИНЕ //Гуманитарные, социально-экономические и общественные науки. – 2022. – №. 2. – С. 148-151

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).