Carebots and Caregivers: Sustaining the Ethical Ideal of Care in the Twenty-First Century
- 1.4k Downloads
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.
KeywordsCarebots Capabilities Virtue ethics Care ethics
- Aristotle (1984). The complete works of Aristotle: Revised Oxford translation. J. Barnes, Ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Becker, L. C. (1986). Reciprocity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: Personal, political, global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Kittay, E. F. (1999). Love’s labor: Essays on women, equality, and dependency. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
- Singer, P. W. (2009). Wired for war: The robotics revolution and conflict in the 21st century. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
- 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.
- 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.
- Vallor, S. (2010). Social networking technology and the virtues. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(2), 157–170.Google Scholar
- Vallor, S. (2011). Flourishing on Facebook: Virtue friendship and new social media. Ethics and Information Technology. doi: 10.1007/s10676-010-9262-2.