AI doctors: who is liable?

Written by Juwon Lee

As technology rapidly develops in the 21st century, countless fields have chosen artificial intelligence (AI) models over human workers; AIs have taken the places of teachers, factory workers, and even cashiers, interacting with customers with pixelated smiles. Consequently, employers and business owners can buy affordable machines instead of having a monthly paycheck leaking out of their bank accounts, workers do not have to bear the emotional rigor of masking dissatisfaction with a smile in front of customers, and consumers can trust these machines to not make human errors. In theory, society has significantly improved. Nonetheless, this fragile bubble functions under the assumption that algorithms are faultless and that AI does not make mistakes. Recognising this, recent polls show that most patients prefer human doctors (National Library of Medicine, 2024), despite AI doctors being more knowledgeable and potentially less careless. Is AI truly that faulty, or are we being paranoid?

A real life case where AI put a patient’s life at risk happened here, in Vietnam. A 38 year old woman had been diagnosed to have dangerously high cholesterol levels by her doctor in Ho Chi Minh (Thúy Phương & Vietnamnet Global, 2025). Yet, instead of conforming to his advice, the patient followed ChatGPT’s suggestions and stopped taking her medication. The misinformation on the internet and ChapGPT had caused her to believe that she could get better without any medicine. Ultimately, this decision led to a surge in cholesterol, getting the patient dangerously close to blocking her coronary arteries (Thúy Phương & Vietnamnet Global, 2025). Although she was able to receive proper treatment in time, this case reflects how vulnerable society is to misinformation, and the dangers of using AI in critical fields such as medicine.

Yet, it seems to be inevitable that the reliance on AI in the field of medicine is increasing, and with that, problems arise: who is liable in case of a malfunction? Who will face the consequences, if any, and whose shoulders will the guilt fall on? Some believe that it is the patient’s own fault, seeing as they are the ones who had chosen an AI doctor over a human one; technology is a tool that must be used appropriately, and it is up to the user to use it well and be mindful of the risks. Others point out that the corporation developing that AI model should be held accountable for misinforming users and leading them on to trust the large language model rather than specialists. Yet, minimal laws specifically targeting AI use in healthcare have been created, and are insufficient to protect patients and healthcare workers (United Nations, 2025). This creates a grey area where the liability of AI doctors are concerned, leaving the matter up for debate. 

So, in an era where technology can be found in every aspect of our lives, is AI something we should rely on, or something we should be protected from?

References

Federation of State Medical Boards. (n.d.). About Physician Discipline. FSMB. Retrieved April 16, 2026, from https://www.fsmb.org/u.s.-medical-regulatory-trends-and-actions/guide-to-medical-regulation-in-the-united-states/about-physician-discipline

National Library of Medicine. (2024, August 12). Do patients prefer a human doctor, artificial intelligence, or a blend, and is this preference dependent on medical discipline? Empirical evidence and implications for medical practice. PMC. Retrieved April 16, 2026, from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11345249/

Thúy Phương, & Vietnamnet Global. (2025, November 10). AI nearly killed two women after they followed ChatGPT's advice. VietNamNet. Retrieved May 30, 2026, from https://vietnamnet.vn/en/ai-nearly-killed-two-women-after-they-followed-chatgpt-s-advice-2461284.html 

United Nations. (2025, November 19). UN calls for legal safeguards for AI in healthcare. UN calls for legal safeguards for AI in healthcare. https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/11/1166400