The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis—Remedying the inadequacy of a risk‐based regulation

Bioethics 37 (3):303-311 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that patients who are subjects of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-supported diagnosis and treatment planning should have a right to a second opinion, but also that this right should not necessarily be construed as a right to a physician opinion. The right to a second opinion could potentially be satisfied by another independent AI system. Our considerations on the right to second opinion are embedded in the wider debate on different approaches to the regulation of AI, and we conclude the article by providing a number of reasons for preferring a rights-based approach over a risk-based approach.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Editorial: Risks of general artificial intelligence.Vincent C. Müller - 2014 - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 26 (3):297-301.
Risks of artificial general intelligence.Vincent C. Müller (ed.) - 2014 - Taylor & Francis (JETAI).
Intelligence, Artificial and Otherwise.Paul Dumouchel - 2019 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 24 (2):241-258.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-12-01

Downloads
11 (#1,141,924)

6 months
5 (#647,370)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references