A missed serious condition can cause serious harm and leave a family with anger and difficult questions. Those emotions may deepen if artificial intelligence (AI) influenced the decision.
If AI contributed to an error involving your loved one, you may wonder who bears responsibility. Learning how malpractice rules apply to this technology can help you find key records and identify possible sources of liability.
Hospitals now use AI to review mammograms, CT scans and pathology slides. Other systems assess symptoms or flag unusual test results. These programs generally assist doctors, who still make the final decisions about patient care. An investigation may therefore focus on these potentially liable parties in Maryland or Washington, DC.
The physician who made the diagnosis
A doctor generally remains responsible for using reasonable clinical judgment, even when software assists with a diagnosis. The standard of care may require the physician to consider the program’s output along with symptoms and test results. The doctor and medical providers cannot avoid legal liability for medical malpractice just because the AI got it wrong.
For example, a radiologist could face liability for accepting an AI result that conflicts with a visible abnormality on a scan. Ignoring a credible alert without a sound medical reason may also support a negligence claim. In either case, you generally need proof that the doctor failed to meet the accepted standard of care and caused the injury.
The hospital that deployed the system
A hospital could face direct negligence allegations if it selected unreliable software without proper review and safeguards in place to prevent improper reliance on AI results. Similar concerns may arise if the facility failed to train its staff or kept using a tool with known problems. Liability would generally depend on proof that the institution’s conduct contributed to the harm.
AI may also affect access to treatment before a doctor provides care. In Maryland, the law regulates AI use in certain insurance reviews, although this rule may not govern bedside diagnosis. Covered insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and private review agents cannot let an algorithm deny, delay or modify health care services. These entities typically must also review the tool’s performance, use and outcomes at least quarterly.
The company that developed the software
A developer might face a negligence or product liability claim if a defect in the program contributed to the damage. Hidden error rates or weak safety warnings could also become relevant.
However, the available legal theory may depend on how the governing law classifies the software. Some courts can treat it as a product, while others may view it as part of a service. Product liability rules also vary by state. These cases would be challenging to pursue, and since the technology is new, the results would be unpredictable.
What records may identify the responsible parties?
Your loved one’s chart may not name every digital tool involved in the diagnosis. Audit trails, AI outputs and clinician notes could show who received an alert and what action followed. Finding these materials may take time, which makes the filing period important. In Washington DC and Maryland there is a 3 year deadline called the statute of limitations for bringing such claims, and there could be shorter notice requirements. You should not wait until the last minute, and lawyers will usually want to start investigating a case with a least 1 year ahead of the statute of limitations.
Protecting your family’s ability to seek answers
AI can make a diagnostic error harder to trace because several systems may store key information. Your loved one’s medical chart might reveal only part of the story.
Legal guidance can help your family preserve technical records and review the course of treatment. If you believe AI contributed to your loved one’s injury, consider contacting the firm. Our medical malpractice attorney can assess the evidence. They may also explain whether the facts may support a claim.