AMBIENTUM BIOETHICA BIOLOGIA CHEMIA DIGITALIA DRAMATICA EDUCATIO ARTIS GYMNAST. ENGINEERING EPHEMERIDES EUROPAEA GEOGRAPHIA GEOLOGIA HISTORIA HISTORIA ARTIUM INFORMATICA IURISPRUDENTIA MATHEMATICA MUSICA NEGOTIA OECONOMICA PHILOLOGIA PHILOSOPHIA PHYSICA POLITICA PSYCHOLOGIA-PAEDAGOGIA SOCIOLOGIA THEOLOGIA CATHOLICA THEOLOGIA CATHOLICA LATIN THEOLOGIA GR.-CATH. VARAD THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXA THEOLOGIA REF. TRANSYLVAN
The STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS BABEŞ-BOLYAI issue article summary
The summary of the selected article appears at the bottom of the page. In order to get back to the contents of the issue this article belongs to you have to access the link from the title. In order to see all the articles of the archive which have as author/co-author one of the authors mentioned below, you have to access the link from the author's name.
Authors: NIKLAS ELLERICH-GROPPE, MERLE WEßEL, MARK SCHWEDA.
DOI: 10.24193/subbbioethica.2021.spiss.42
Published Online: 2021-06-30
Published Print: 2021-06-30
pp.72
FULL PDF
ABSTRACT: Parallel Session I, Room 4 In light of demographic aging, the change of familial care arrangements, and the lack of skilled caretakers, robotic systems are increasingly discussed as a possible solution for eldercare. Sociopsychological research indicates that the ensuing human-robot interaction involves the same social categories as human-human interaction, e.g., gender, age and ethnicity. Indeed, these categories and related stereotypical markers are even strategically used in technology development to increase the acceptance and efficiency of robotic systems. Especially in vulnerable groups such as older people, however, such stereotyping strategies can be a reason for new vulnerabilities in digitalized care settings and cause serious moral problems that need critical reflection. In our contribution, we provide a systematic ethical analysis of stereotyping in robotic eldercare. Starting from the conceptual distinction between agency-based and harm-based conceptions of vulnerability, we explore potential moral issues and conflicts in the implementation of stereotypical care robots for older people and detect particularly serious challenges regarding users’ autonomy and wellbeing. Against this backdrop, we propose and discuss possible solutions like the explanation, neutralization or queering of care robots. Thus, we contribute to the theoretical conceptualization of older people’s vulnerabilities in increasingly digitalized care settings and draw conclusions for ethically sensitive technology development in eldercare.
