A cleaning robot in a care home — as long as it doesn't become a trip hazard, that's hardly headline news. AI-assisted diagnostics and care planning? Most people can probably make their peace with that. But robots entering into direct contact with patients and their families, and engaging in emotional interactions — that's a different matter entirely.
Robots have no stake whatsoever in a patient's wellbeing
Ethicist Alexandra Kaiser-Duliba focused her doctoral research on the use of robotics and AI in care settings. Her position is clear: wherever human interaction is at the heart of the work, data-driven systems and robotics have no place. 'Large language models have become quite good at mimicking emotions and linguistic nuance — but mimicry is all it is. There is no genuine concern for the patient's wellbeing. Vulnerable groups such as people with dementia often can no longer tell whether they are speaking to a human or a machine.'
AI frequently leads to work intensification and self-exploitation
The ethical concerns around AI and robotics in care settings are plain to see. In a conventional office environment, you need to look more carefully. Efficiency gains from AI are widely acknowledged across many fields. But what looks like a relief from pressure can quickly translate into work intensification. 'Employees often feel compelled to optimise their own performance and productivity using digital tools. This can push them to overextend themselves for the sake of company success — all the way to burnout.' Kaiser-Duliba links this pattern of self-exploitation to a perceived sense of autonomy — and the pressure to keep pace with the speed of systems whilst remaining permanently reachable.
When things go well, the machine takes the credit
AI-generated content also raises questions of authorship. An 'achievement gap' emerges: when work succeeds, the recognition and credit tend to go to the machine or the system rather than to the employees themselves. 'When workers are alienated from their own output, it undermines their dignity and the very meaning of their work,' says Alexandra Kaiser-Duliba.
Commercial logic trumps ethics
Dr Alexandra Kaiser-Duliba observes that many companies engage only superficially with the ethical dimensions of AI. Economic viability and technical feasibility consistently take precedence. 'Cost-efficiency is frequently treated as the overriding principle. Employees, meanwhile, are to be replaced by so-called AI within the value chain. Economic reality is crowding out ethical reasoning.' The consequences of this logic could mean widespread redundancies, with the costs and risks shifted squarely onto individuals.
