#WeAreNotWaiting:: DIY artificial pancreas systems and challenges for the law

Rachael Dickson; Jessica Bell; Amber Dar; Laura Downey; Muireann Quigley; Victoria Moore

doi:10.1111/dme.14715

#WeAreNotWaiting: DIY artificial pancreas systems and challenges for the law

Rachael Dickson, Jessica Bell, Amber Dar, Laura Downey, Muireann Quigley, Victoria Moore

Birmingham Law School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

50 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Commercial hybrid closed-loop systems are becoming more readily available, yet the number of DIY artificial pancreas system (DIY APS) users continues to rise. These DIY systems have not gone through the usual regulatory approvals processes, and, thus, present a number of legal difficulties for a number of actors, including clinicians, parents who build DIY APS for their children, and users themselves. These issues have so far received insufficient attention. Due to the complex constellation of actors involved in both development of DIY APSs and in its deployment, it is not currently clear who, and to what extent, different parties might (successfully) be held liable if something goes wrong. Despite this uncertainty, unless and until clearer guidance is issued by relevant bodies, or a case appears before the courts which clarify the situation, existing legal principles apply. In this article, we examine some of these to shed light on how the law would likely be applied if harm were to result from the use of a DIY APS.

Original language	English
Article number	e14715
Number of pages	8
Journal	Diabetic Medicine
Early online date	12 Oct 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14715
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 12 Oct 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by a Wellcome Trust Investigator Award in Humanities and Social Sciences 2019–2024 (Grant No. 212507/Z/18/Z), an ESRC Impact Acceleration Award, and a Quality‐related Research grant from Research England.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

Keywords

clinical diabetes
devices
medical law
patients

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/dme.14715Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution (CC BY)

dicksonr2021wearenFinal published version, 1.15 MBLicence: Creative Commons: Attribution (CC BY)

Everyday Cyborgs 2.0: Law's Boundary-Work & Alternative Legal Futures
Quigley, M.
THE WELLCOME TRUST
1/09/19 → 1/09/25
Project: Research

Cite this

@article{26e2c2a597674c4084afe0ff5d6e4284,

title = "#WeAreNotWaiting:: DIY artificial pancreas systems and challenges for the law",

abstract = "Commercial hybrid closed-loop systems are becoming more readily available, yet the number of DIY artificial pancreas system (DIY APS) users continues to rise. These DIY systems have not gone through the usual regulatory approvals processes, and, thus, present a number of legal difficulties for a number of actors, including clinicians, parents who build DIY APS for their children, and users themselves. These issues have so far received insufficient attention. Due to the complex constellation of actors involved in both development of DIY APSs and in its deployment, it is not currently clear who, and to what extent, different parties might (successfully) be held liable if something goes wrong. Despite this uncertainty, unless and until clearer guidance is issued by relevant bodies, or a case appears before the courts which clarify the situation, existing legal principles apply. In this article, we examine some of these to shed light on how the law would likely be applied if harm were to result from the use of a DIY APS.",

keywords = "clinical diabetes, devices, medical law, patients",

author = "Rachael Dickson and Jessica Bell and Amber Dar and Laura Downey and Muireann Quigley and Victoria Moore",

note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by a Wellcome Trust Investigator Award in Humanities and Social Sciences 2019–2024 (Grant No. 212507/Z/18/Z), an ESRC Impact Acceleration Award, and a Quality‐related Research grant from Research England. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.",

year = "2021",

month = oct,

day = "12",

doi = "10.1111/dme.14715",

language = "English",

journal = "Diabetic Medicine",

issn = "0742-3071",

publisher = "Wiley",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - #WeAreNotWaiting:

T2 - DIY artificial pancreas systems and challenges for the law

AU - Dickson, Rachael

AU - Bell, Jessica

AU - Dar, Amber

AU - Downey, Laura

AU - Quigley, Muireann

AU - Moore, Victoria

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by a Wellcome Trust Investigator Award in Humanities and Social Sciences 2019–2024 (Grant No. 212507/Z/18/Z), an ESRC Impact Acceleration Award, and a Quality‐related Research grant from Research England. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

PY - 2021/10/12

Y1 - 2021/10/12

N2 - Commercial hybrid closed-loop systems are becoming more readily available, yet the number of DIY artificial pancreas system (DIY APS) users continues to rise. These DIY systems have not gone through the usual regulatory approvals processes, and, thus, present a number of legal difficulties for a number of actors, including clinicians, parents who build DIY APS for their children, and users themselves. These issues have so far received insufficient attention. Due to the complex constellation of actors involved in both development of DIY APSs and in its deployment, it is not currently clear who, and to what extent, different parties might (successfully) be held liable if something goes wrong. Despite this uncertainty, unless and until clearer guidance is issued by relevant bodies, or a case appears before the courts which clarify the situation, existing legal principles apply. In this article, we examine some of these to shed light on how the law would likely be applied if harm were to result from the use of a DIY APS.

AB - Commercial hybrid closed-loop systems are becoming more readily available, yet the number of DIY artificial pancreas system (DIY APS) users continues to rise. These DIY systems have not gone through the usual regulatory approvals processes, and, thus, present a number of legal difficulties for a number of actors, including clinicians, parents who build DIY APS for their children, and users themselves. These issues have so far received insufficient attention. Due to the complex constellation of actors involved in both development of DIY APSs and in its deployment, it is not currently clear who, and to what extent, different parties might (successfully) be held liable if something goes wrong. Despite this uncertainty, unless and until clearer guidance is issued by relevant bodies, or a case appears before the courts which clarify the situation, existing legal principles apply. In this article, we examine some of these to shed light on how the law would likely be applied if harm were to result from the use of a DIY APS.

KW - clinical diabetes

KW - devices

KW - medical law

KW - patients

UR - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dme.14715

U2 - 10.1111/dme.14715

DO - 10.1111/dme.14715

M3 - Article

C2 - 34637553

SN - 0742-3071

JO - Diabetic Medicine

JF - Diabetic Medicine

M1 - e14715

ER -