I presume one reason may be because tech industry may be a bit insular, and full of people who enjoy creating complex models of the world - trying to find a perfect technological solution to everything (when they should just try to find a good hiring manager in stead).
Medicine does move on, but a lot of what a doctor needs to do doesn't. And the bits that do are actually a problem with there not being a good way of ensuring that doctors use up to date techniques.
The difference is that structural engineers and doctors are safeguarding safety, and (most) software engineers aren't. If someone suggested people should need chartered status to work on medical device software I don't think that would be as controversial, and will get progressively less so as the discipline is less brand new and progress slows down a bit.
Many apps that I encounter, are pretty much bald-faced, unapologetic, data harvesters. That’s clearly their main purpose, and their stated purpose is really just the lure on an anglerfish.
“Move fast and break things” sounds good, until you realize that said “things” may be people’s lives.
The mere thought of doing that, in the tech world, though, brings about collective apoplexy. I'm not especially a fan of how licenses can be used to protect incumbents, and bar entry to otherwise highly capable people. They do, however, go a long ways towards ensuring that a building doesn't fall down, the first time a hot rod drives by.
But hiring always has been "pot luck." Been that way, for -literally- thousands of years. That's why hiring good managers has always been important, and there's really no way to test for that. For whatever reason, we seem to think we get to play by different rules.