Activities of Elena GENTILE related to 2018/2088(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on a comprehensive European industrial policy on artificial intelligence and robotics
Amendments (6)
Amendment 40 #
2. Stresses, however, that the existing system for the approval of medical devices is not be adequate for AI technologies; calls on the Commission to closely monitor progress on these technologies and to propose changes to the regulatory framework if necessary in order to establish the framework for determining the respective liability of the user (doctor/professional), the producer of the technological solution, and the healthcare facility offering the treatment, in relation to the patient, the object being to ease the position for the patient, should he or she be harmed, by making it possible to gather the necessary evidence, where appropriate by guaranteeing access to, and the possibility of interpreting, data generated by the technological application used, and by laying down a single party clearly liable in relation to the patient for the overall outcome of the treatment; accordingly believes that one option to consider might be to apply risk management rules as opposed to mere liability for fault;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to lay down clear rules for determining the respective liability of the user (doctor/professional), the producer of the technological solution, and the healthcare facility offering the treatment in order to avert continuing reliance on defensive medicine and preserve professional discretion, the object being to ensure that users will not be led invariably to back the diagnostic solution or treatment suggested by a technological instrument for fear of being sued for damages if, on the basis of their informed professional judgement, they were to reach conclusions that diverged even in part; maintains that defensive medicine not only produces damaging results for the economic sustainability of public health systems, but can also serve to dehumanise the doctor- patient relationship by turning it into a professional-client relationship;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to allocate greater funding to AI and robotic research and encourage AI experts and European and non- European companies to create innovative jobs enhancing research on public health issues;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to draw up far-reaching plans aimed at attracting key stakeholders and main players from the fields of IT, mathematics, bioengineering and pharmaceutics to open AI biomedical and bionic research centres all across Europe; calls on the Commission to consider setting up bioethics committees to determine whether and under what conditions the use of a given technological solution, with particular reference to biomedical robotics for human enhancement, might be considered appropriate and in accordance with the fundamental principles of human dignity and equality and hence could be authorised;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to increase funding in health- related AI technologies; welcomes, in this context, the declaration of cooperation signed by 24 EU Member States and Norway with a view to boosting the impact of investments in AI at European level. ; calls on the Member States and the Commission to consider whether training programmes for medical and healthcare personnel should be updated and standardised on a Europe-wide basis so as to ensure high levels of expertise and a level playing field in the Member States as regards knowledge and use of the most advanced technological instruments in robotic surgery, biomedicine, and artificial intelligence-based biomedical imaging;