1. Introduction
With the growing integration of technology in medicine, robotic surgery and autonomous medical systems are transforming patient care. However, these advancements raise complex legal questions—particularly in the event of a malfunction or complication—regarding who bears responsibility. In Turkish law, this area is still developing, and the multi-actor nature of liability requires careful legal examination.
2. What is Robotic Surgery?
Robotic surgery allows doctors to perform operations using robotic systems controlled remotely. While the physician remains central to the intervention, the operation is conducted via robotic arms. In the event of an error, this raises the issue of liability not only for the physician but also for the technology provider.
3. Autonomous Medical Systems and Artificial Intelligence
Autonomous systems can diagnose, suggest treatments, or even perform medical procedures without direct human intervention. These systems use AI algorithms to analyze patient data and make decisions. When harm arises from such decisions, legal responsibility may fall on:
- The physician,
- The software developer,
- The device manufacturer, or
- The healthcare institution.
4. Liability Framework Under Turkish Law
a) Physician Liability
Under the Turkish Code of Obligations and the Patients’ Rights Regulation, physicians must exercise professional care and diligence. Even with robotic systems, physicians are responsible for appropriate system use and proper patient communication.
b) Liability of Software and Device Manufacturers
If the harm stems from a defect in the algorithm or device, liability may arise under defective product or contractual defect rules in Turkish civil law.
c) Healthcare Institution Liability
Hospitals and medical centers may be held strictly liable for organizational faults, especially when they employ the physician or provide the technological infrastructure.
5. Informed Consent Obligations
Whenever technological systems are used in medical procedures, patients must be clearly informed about the system’s characteristics, risks, and alternatives. Failure to obtain informed consent may render the procedure legally invalid, making both the physician and healthcare institution liable.
6. Legal Personality of AI: A Global Debate
An ongoing global discussion is whether AI systems themselves can be held liable. Under Turkish law, AI does not have legal personality—neither as a natural nor a legal person—so liability cannot be attributed directly to the system itself.
7. Need for Future Regulation
Currently, Turkish law does not contain specific regulations on robotic or AI-driven medical systems. Future legal disputes will depend heavily on judicial precedents, creating unpredictability. Therefore, there is a need for a clear, fair, and balanced legal framework that addresses these technologies.
8. Conclusion
While robotic surgery and autonomous systems are reshaping healthcare, they also introduce legal uncertainty regarding liability. Clarifying the legal responsibilities of physicians, manufacturers, and healthcare providers is essential for both patient safety and technological innovation. In this evolving area, specialized legal consultancy at the intersection of health law and technology law is increasingly critical.
Yanıt yok