Let the Computers Decide?

Imagine a computer algorithm that decides whether or not incapacitated patients in dire situations would want treatment. Doctors could feed the algorithm treatment options as well as their patient's background information and be told whether or not to move forward, thus relieving humans of the decision making responsibility.

The algorithm exists as a simple formula which gives the thumbs up if the chance of recovery is greater than 1%. In a simulated environment it had an accuracy of 78% and beat its human counterparts, spurring Bioethicist David Wendler of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, US and colleagues to more research:

Wendler now wants to collect medical care preferences from people of various ethnic, religious and gender groups, which will help his team refine the formula. He believes that a computer program might one day predict patient's wishes to an accuracy of 90%.

"I believe it would be extremely irresponsible to allow machines to make decisions involving life and death," says Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schiavo. Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years until she died in 2005 after doctors removed her feeding tube. Her case sparked huge debate in the US.

"If a person becomes incapacitated, is not dying, and can assimilate food and water via a feeding tube, then I believe that we are morally obligated to care for the person and provide them this basic care - regardless of a computer attempting to 'predict' what that person's wishes might be," Schindler adds.

"Essentially, you would be allowing a machine to determine what is ethical, what is right and wrong, which no machine is able to do."

Wesley Smith has more.