Further remarks on testimonial injustice in medical machine learning

A response to commentaries

Journal Article (2023)
Author(s)

Giorgia Pozzi (TU Delft - Technology, Policy and Management)

Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-109302 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2023
Language
English
Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Journal title
Journal of medical ethics
Issue number
8
Volume number
49
Article number
jme-2023-109302
Downloads counter
142

Abstract

In my paper entitled 'Testimonial injustice in medical machine learning',1 I argued that machine learning (ML)-based Prediction Drug Monitoring Programmes (PDMPs) could infringe on patients' epistemic and moral standing inflicting a testimonial injustice.2 I am very grateful for all the comments the paper received, some of which expand on it while others take a more critical view. This response addresses two objections raised to my consideration of ML-induced testimonial injustice in order to clarify the position taken in the paper. The first maintains that my critical stance toward ML-based PDMPs idealises standard medical practice. Moreover, it claims that the ML-induced testimonial injustice I discuss is not substantially different from situations in which it emerges in human-human interactions. The second claims that my analysis does not establish a link to issues of automation bias, even if these are to be considered the core of testimonial injustice in ML.