Minds and Machines 16 (2):141-161 (2006)

Authors
Robert Sparrow
Monash University
Abstract
It is remarkable how much robotics research is promoted by appealing to the idea that the only way to deal with a looming demographic crisis is to develop robots to look after older persons. This paper surveys and assesses the claims made on behalf of robots in relation to their capacity to meet the needs of older persons. We consider each of the roles that has been suggested for robots in aged care and attempt to evaluate how successful robots might be in these roles. We do so from the perspective of writers concerned primarily with the quality of aged care, paying particular attention to the social and ethical implications of the introduction of robots, rather than from the perspective of robotics, engineering, or computer science. We emphasis the importance of the social and emotional needs of older persons—which, we argue, robots are incapable of meeting—in almost any task involved in their care. Even if robots were to become capable of filling some service roles in the aged-care sector, economic pressures on the sector would most likely ensure that the result was a decrease in the amount of human contact experienced by older persons being cared for, which itself would be detrimental to their well-being. This means that the prospects for the ethical use of robots in the aged-care sector are far fewer than first appears. More controversially, we believe that it is not only misguided, but actually unethical, to attempt to substitute robot simulacra for genuine social interaction. A subsidiary goal of this paper is to draw attention to the discourse about aged care and robotics and locate it in the context of broader social attitudes towards older persons. We conclude by proposing a deliberative process involving older persons as a test for the ethics of the use of robots in aged care.
Keywords Aged care   Assistive technology   Electronic monitoring   Ethics   Human---robot interaction   Robots   Social robotics
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11023-006-9030-6
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,304
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Democracy and Disagreement.Amy Gutmann - 1996 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Deliberation Day.Bruce Ackerman & James S. Fishkin - 2002 - Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2):129–152.
The March of the Robot Dogs.Robert Sparrow - 2002 - Ethics and Information Technology 4 (4):305-318.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Philosophical Case for Robot Friendship.John Danaher - forthcoming - Journal of Posthuman Studies.
The Future of Value Sensitive Design.Batya Friedman, David Hendry, Steven Umbrello, Jeroen Van Den Hoven & Daisy Yoo - 2020 - Paradigm Shifts in ICT Ethics: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference ETHICOMP 2020.
Designing Robots for Care: Care Centered Value-Sensitive Design.Aimee van Wynsberghe - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):407-433.

View all 61 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
211 ( #38,707 of 2,330,105 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #35,242 of 2,330,105 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes