Robots in Healthcare? What Patients Say

AGOS, Istanbul (http://www.agos.com.tr), 2019

Artificial intelligence (AI)-powered robots are being introduced for automation in healthcare, and on the street as facial recognition software. However, AI robots can only be as smart and democratic as the data we feed into their algorithms and the persons who use them. AI can also amplify the historical and social injustices embedded in data. For AI and robot ethics, let’s not forget it is us – humans with all our prejudices – and not aliens from space, who are designing and deploying AI robots in healthcare and society.

Health, 2019

In the field of robotics and in the health sciences, transitions have been occurring in the control of robots operating with predetermined logic and rules. Robotics in health care are influencing human caring dynamics in many ways such as enhancing dependency and surrender to machine technologies. Situations such as these are charged with possibilities of legal liabilities triggered by influences and consequences of advancing robotic technology dependency. The purpose of this paper is to identify, describe, and explain legal issues and/or dilemmas centered on robotics in healthcare while providing engaging opportunities to limit consequent legalities thus forming beneficial human health care outcomes. Laying bare these liabilities will provide critically informative data that can foster proactive encounters which can or may deter health care liabilities while ensuring quality healthcare outcomes. An attempt is made to re-conceptualize how to view agency, causality, liability responsibility , culpability, and autonomy for the new age of autonomous robots. While it is still not clear how this would turn out, a clear framing of the problem is the first step in the project.

Robotics

Background: There has been a rapid increase in the population of senior citizens in many countries. The shortage of caregivers is becoming a pressing concern. Robots are being deployed in an attempt to fill this gap and reduce the workload of caregivers. This study explores how healthcare robots are perceived by trainee care professionals. Methods: A total of 2365 students at different vocational levels completed a questionnaire, rating ethical statements regarding beneficence, maleficence, justice, autonomy, utility, and use intentions with regard to three different types of robots (assistive, monitoring, and companion) along with six control variables: gender, age, school year, technical skills, interest in technology, and enjoying working with computers. The scores were analyzed by MANOVA statistics. Results: In relation to our research questions: All students viewed companion robots as more beneficent than monitoring and assistive robots. Level of education did not lead to any d...

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021

Various intelligent technologies have been applied during COVID-19, which has become a worldwide public health emergency and brought significant challenges to the medical systems around the world. Notably, the application of robots has played a role in hospitals, quarantine facilities and public spaces and has attracted much attention from the media and the public. This study is based on a questionnaire survey on the perception and reception of robots used for medical care in the pandemic among the Chinese population. A total of 1667 people participated in the survey, 93.6% of respondents were pursuing or had completed a bachelor, master or even doctorate degree. The results show that Chinese people generally held positive attitudes towards “anti-pandemic robots” and affirmed their contribution to reducing the burden of medical care and virus transmission. A few respondents were concerned about the issues of robots replacing humans and it was apparent that their ethical views on robots were not completely consistent across their demographics (e.g., age, industry). Nevertheless, most respondents tended to be optimistic about robot applications and dialectical about the ethical issues involved. This is related to the prominent role robots played during the pandemic, the Chinese public’s expectations of new technologies and technology-friendly public opinion in China. Exploring the perception and reception of anti-pandemic robots in different countries or cultures is important because it can shed some light on the future applications of robots, especially in the field of infectious disease control.

AI & SOCIETY

In the scenario of growing polarization of promises and dangers that surround artificial intelligence (AI), how to introduce responsible AI and robotics in healthcare? In this paper, we develop an ethical–political approach to introduce democratic mechanisms to technological development, what we call “Caring in the In-Between”. Focusing on the multiple possibilities for action that emerge in the realm of uncertainty, we propose an ethical and responsible framework focused on care actions in between fears and hopes. Using the theoretical perspective of Science and Technology Studies and empirical research, “Caring in the In-Between” is based on three movements: the first is a change of focus from the world of promises and dangers to the world of uncertainties; the second is a conceptual shift from assuming a relationship with robotics based on a Human–Robot Interaction to another focused on the network in which the robot is embedded (the “Robot Embedded in a Network”); and the last i...

AI & SOCIETY

When the social relevance of robotic applications is addressed today, the use of assistive technology in care settings is almost always the first example. So-called care robots are presented as a solution to the nursing crisis, despite doubts about their technological readiness and the lack of concrete usage scenarios in everyday nursing practice. We inquire into this interconnection of social robotics and care. We show how both are made available for each other in three arenas: innovation policy, care organization, and robotic engineering. First, we analyze the discursive “logics” of care robotics within European innovation policy, second, we disclose how care robotics is encountering a historically grown conflict within health care organization, and third we show how care scenarios are being used in robotic engineering. From this diagnosis, we derive a threefold critique of robotics in healthcare, which calls attention to the politics, historicity, and social situatedness of care ...

Journal of Practical Nurse Education and Practice

There is an increasing use of machines that use artificial intelligence (AI) in the healthcare setting. Given the current shortages in human resources, the idea of care robots and other AI supportive systems is an emerging potential solution. However, AI such as care robots may pose the question of whether the notion of care is compatible with designs that focus on data and efficiencies. In this paper, I endeavour to examine the application of AI such as care robots and use relational ethics to anchor the discussion. I invite readers to contemplate some legal, ethical, and social implications regarding the use of AI in healthcare. In addition, I am offering some practice implications that could be relevant in the healthcare setting. I wrote with a reflective approach. It is my position that the application of relational ethics is appropriate when we consider using AI in healthcare because if AI such as care robots are to care for humans, then its functions should have relational ele...

The development of (social) robots reflects engineers’ understanding of societal arenas as well as the social actors primarily responsible for structuring and shaping these arenas. On these grounds, the design of (social) robots is contingent upon the role model of the persons performing the task the robot is supposed to take over or help with through cooperation. It is, therefore, of paramount importance to reflect these understandings and where necessary to replace stereotypes with more sophisticated views. To contribute in this respect, the workshop will address key factors regarding the development of (social) robots with the purpose to be integrated in health care scenarios: (a) What are the benefits that could be expected particularly within the scope of societies endangered by a strong demographic shift (e.g. Japan and Germany)? (b) What are the common concerns that are raised by the persons working in the field and the target user, and how should academic researcher as well as employees of R&D departments reflect and take these concerns into consideration? (c) Should there be limits regarding the use of robots in specific scenarios and/or persons respectively patients? Finally, how could criteria to determine these limits look like and are they (always) transcultural?

Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 2023

The development of care robots has been accompanied by a number of technical and social challenges, which are guided by the question: "What is a robot for?" Debates guided by this question have discussed the functionalities and tasks that can be delegated to a machine that does not harm human dignity. However, we argue that these ethical debates do not offer any alternatives for designing care robots for the common good. In particular, we stress the need to shift the current ethical discussion on care robots towards a reflection on the politics of robotics, understanding politics as the search for the common good. To develop this proposal, we use the theoretical perspective of science and technology studies, which we integrate into the analysis of disagreement inspired by a consensusdissensus way of thinking, based on discussing and rethinking the relationships of care robots with the common good and the subjects of such good. Thus, the politics of care robots allows for the emergence of a set of discussions on how human-machine configurations are designed and practiced, as well as the role of the market of technological innovation in the organisation of care.

The discussion about robots in elderly care is populated by doom scenarios about a totally dehumanized care system in which elderly people are taken care of by machines. Such scenarios are helpful as they attend us to what we think is important with regard to the quality elderly care. However, this article argues that they are misleading in so far as they (1) assume that deception in care is always morally unacceptable, (2) suggest that robots and other information technologies necessarily deceive elderly people by creating a “virtual” world as opposed to a “real” world, (3) assume that elderly people of the future have similar ICT skills and interests as the elderly people of today, and (4) assume a simplistic view of technologies. The article suggests an approach to evaluating care robots and ICT in health care which acknowledges and addresses a number of ethical problems raised by robotic care—for instance disengagement problems—while taking into account that some elderly people may need care that does not treat them as (empirically) autonomous, that many the elderly of the future are likely to be digital natives, and that the task of evaluating technologies in care is more complicated than the discussion of deception suggests.