Philosophy & Technology

, 24:251 | Cite as

Carebots and Caregivers: Sustaining the Ethical Ideal of Care in the Twenty-First Century

Special Issue

Abstract

In the early twenty-first century, we stand on the threshold of welcoming robots into domains of human activity that will expand their presence in our lives dramatically. One provocative new frontier in robotics, motivated by a convergence of demographic, economic, cultural, and institutional pressures, is the development of “carebots”—robots intended to assist or replace human caregivers in the practice of caring for vulnerable persons such as the elderly, young, sick, or disabled. I argue here that existing philosophical reflections on the ethical implications of carebots neglect a critical dimension of the issue: namely, the potential moral value of caregiving practices for caregivers. This value, I argue, gives rise to considerations that must be weighed alongside consideration of the likely impact of carebots on care recipients. Focusing on the goods internal to caring practices, I then examine the potential impact of carebots on caregivers by means of three complementary ethical approaches: virtue ethics, care ethics, and the capabilities approach. Each of these, I argue, sheds new light on the contexts in which carebots might deprive potential caregivers of important moral goods central to caring practices, as well as those contexts in which carebots might help caregivers sustain or even enrich those practices, and their attendant goods.

Keywords

Carebots Capabilities Virtue ethics Care ethics 

References

  1. Aristotle (1984). The complete works of Aristotle: Revised Oxford translation. J. Barnes, Ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Becker, L. C. (1986). Reciprocity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Borenstein, J., & Pearson, Y. (2010). Robot caregivers: harbingers of expanded freedom for all? Ethics and Information Technology, 12(3), 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coeckelbergh, M. (2010). Health care, capabilities and AI assistive technologies. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 13(2), 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coeckebergh, M. (2009). Personal robots, appearance and human good: A methodological reflection on roboethics. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(3), 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Decker, M. (2008). Caregiving robots and ethical reflection: The perspective of interdisciplinary technology assessment. AI & Society, 22(3), 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: Personal, political, global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kittay, E. F. (1999). Love’s labor: Essays on women, equality, and dependency. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  14. Sharkey, A., & Sharkey, N. (2010). Granny and the robots: Ethical issues in robot care for the elderly. Ethics and Information Technology. doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9234-6.Google Scholar
  15. Singer, P. W. (2009). Wired for war: The robotics revolution and conflict in the 21st century. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  16. Sparrow, R., & Sparrow, L. (2006). In the hands of machines? The future of aged care. Minds and Machines, 16(2), 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tergesen, A., & Inada, M. (2010). It’s not a stuffed animal, it’s a $6000 medical device: Paro the robot seal aims to comfort the elderly, but is it ethical? The Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704463504575301051844937276.html. Accessed January 8, 2011.
  18. Turkle, S. (2006). A nascent robotics culture: New complicities for companionship. July 2006: AAAI Technical Report Series, http://web.mit.edu/sturkle/www/pdfsforstwebpage/st_nascentroboticsculture.pdf. Accessed January 8, 2011.
  19. Vallor, S. (2010). Social networking technology and the virtues. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(2), 157–170.Google Scholar
  20. Vallor, S. (2011). Flourishing on Facebook: Virtue friendship and new social media. Ethics and Information Technology. doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9262-2.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySanta Clara UniversitySanta ClaraUSA

Personalised recommendations