Carebots

Robots in eldercare: looks like it’s a question of when, not if. Our population is aging rapidly, as we baby boomers reach retirement age. We’re living longer too. There are more seniors in Canada now than younger people, so who will look after us all? The home care and long term care industries, always strapped for resources, are eager to find new ways to cut costs. Much robot technology has already been developed and is being deployed in Japan, where the population is aging even faster than ours, and where the use of robots in eldercare is now supported and promoted by government policy. So there’s probably a robot or two in our future. I hope that it’s not just presented to us as a fait accompli, but that first we have a thoughtful discussion about what the risks and benefits are, and who the robots should serve. How will carebots affect our lives?

Carebots can perform many chores now done by personal support workers in home care and long term care. They can bathe us, feed us, lift us into and out of wheelchairs, mop the floor, do the laundry, fetch and carry objects, dispense pills and more. So they could enable us to stay independent longer in our own homes. In long term care, robots would relieve care staff of some repetitive chores. We might even prefer a robot to a human caregiver for intimate tasks like bathing and dressing. But then we will lose the social interaction with human caregivers. Will we miss it? Interaction with human caregivers is not always positive. Who would you rather have change your diaper, a carebot or a resentful, burnt-out daughter? Who will control what the robots do? Will we seniors be empowered to start and stop the tasks? How would carebots be controlled if we have dementia? If the carebot drops you on the floor, who would be liable?

Carebots can be used as health and safety monitors. They could remind us to take our pills, detect falls, take our vital signs and relay them to medical staff, let staff know when we leave our beds, follow us around the house, and enable virtual visits by healthcare professionals or family members controlling the robot remotely. If family members can visit you virtually from the comfort of their own homes, or assure themselves that the carebot is looking after your safety, will they visit you less in person? What privacy do you have when your every move is being monitored, recorded and reported? Who should have access to all that information? What if carebots, in the interests of our safety and well-being, restrain us from doing what we want to do, like going out for a walk or binging on ice cream?

Finally, carebots can be programmed to provide companionship. They can respond to questions, show facial expressions, play games with us, use spoken words and gestures, and suggest activities. There are fuzzy, cuddly robot animals that wag their tails when they’re petted. If family members know the senior is kept busy and entertained with a carebot, will that give them guilt-free permission to visit less often? Is it deceptive and exploitive to encourage seniors to form relationships with machines? Seniors may be well aware that companion robots are not people, but may not mind if they enjoy the interaction anyway.

Policy about the use of robots in eldercare will ultimately be made by politicians, with heavy lobbying by industry players. I hope they seek input from seniors and seniors’ advocates too. Carebots should serve the needs of seniors first and foremost, not caregivers and investors.