FSMB: Don't License AI as a Doctor, Use Physician Oversight
Get the Health newsletter
Daily health & science — research, biotech, public health, the studies worth knowing. Free.
- FSMB President and CEO Humayun J. Chaudhry and Board Chair Christy Valentine Theard argue AI is not ready to be independently licensed like a physician because medical licensure is tied to a social contract of human judgment, ethics, and accountability, not just competent output.
- In 2024, FSMB's House of Delegates adopted nonbinding policy guidance stating state medical boards regulate physicians — not machines — and that physicians remain accountable for harms from inappropriate AI reliance, the authors wrote.
- Proposed legislation in Idaho and Iowa in 2025 would have created separate state licensing boards for "autonomous service providers" outside existing medical boards; the authors note both bills failed but reveal the question is now a legislative one, not a hypothetical.
- Utah's Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy approved a 12-month pilot with health-tech startup Doctronic to automate guideline-based prescription renewals for 192 commonly prescribed drugs under physician oversight, drawing scrutiny from Utah's medical licensing board.
- FSMB has formed a Workgroup on the Regulation of AI in the Practice of Medicine to update its 2024 guidance for the newer wave of agentic systems that move from passive assistance toward autonomous action, the authors said.
Why it matters: Two states — Idaho and Iowa — already tried to route AI medical practice outside physician-run boards in 2025, and Utah's active prescription-renewal pilot shows state AI offices are already authorizing clinical automation; whether medical boards or new AI-specific regulators write the next rulebook will determine who is legally on the hook when an autonomous system harms a patient.
