geb@cadre.UUCP (10/06/84)
This is a subject that we are quite interested in as we develop medical expert systems. There has been no court case nor precedent nor law covering placement of blame in the cases of errors in expert systems. The natural analogy would be medical textbooks. As far as I know, no author of a textbook has been found liable for errors that resulted in mistreatment of a patient. Therefore, the logical liability should lie with the treating physician to properly apply the knowledge. Having said this, it is best to recognize that customs such as this were developed in a much different society of 100 years ago. Now every possible person in a case is considered fair game and undoubtedly until a court rules or legislation is passed, you must consider yourself at risk if you distribute an expert system. Unfortunately, there is no malpractice insurance available for programmers and you will find a clause in just about any other insurance that you might carry that states that the insurance you have doesn't cover any lawsuits stemming from the practice of your profession. Sorry.
forbus@uiucdcsb.UUCP (10/09/84)
Actually, the closest analog to expert systems in current medical practice are equipment used in performing laboratory tests. Doing them properly (and under the proper circumstances) is covered for liability purposes by the idea of an "approved medical procedure". There are, or so I'm told, standard ways of getting such "procedures" approved, and this might be the best route for programmers wishing to avoid malpractice suits.