Technological risks and ethical implications of using robots in long-term care
This qualitative research study explores the technological risks and ethical implications associated with the adoption of robots in long-term care homes through semi-structured interviews with thirty participants. The findings highlight key challenges such as safety concerns, increased staff workload, privacy violations, cost, social justice issues, and the tension between human connection and technology. To address these issues, the authors propose a set of practical recommendations centered on the ETHICS framework: Engagement of stakeholders, Technology benefit and risk assessment, Harm mitigation, Individual autonomy, Cultural safety and justice, and Support of privacy.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Practice leaders, researchers, and care providers seeking to understand and ethically navigate the adoption of robotics in elder care.
What the document contains
The document addresses empirical findings on the technological risks and ethical implications of using social and telepresence robots in long-term care facilities, drawing on stakeholder perspectives and proposing a framework for ethical implementation.
It does not provide legally binding regulatory requirements, mandatory enforcement mechanisms, or formal technical standards for robot manufacturers.
- The integration of robots in long-term care presents technological risks including safety hazards, increased staff workload, privacy intrusions, costs, and social justice concerns.
- While telepresence and social robots can improve social connectedness and alleviate loneliness, they risk reducing genuine human contact if over-relied upon.
- Qualitative interviews with residents, staff, operational leaders, and ethics experts revealed diverging perspectives on the viability and acceptability of care robots.
- The authors propose the ETHICS framework to guide practice leaders in assessing benefits, harms, and ethical considerations when adopting care technologies.
· Introduction · Methods · Results · Discussion · Implications · Conclusion
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
1/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
Practice leaders need to re flect on ethical considerations and engage relevant stakeholders in making technology decisions for everyday care.
Conclusions
screening score · 2026-10-23
Fairness
3/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
C - Cultural safety and justice Practice leaders should inquire diverse perspectives of stakeholders of all groups to ensure inclusion.
Table 1
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Dignity
3/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
Many frontline staff emphasized that people need to be respected in their autonomy, consent, freedom to decline use, and dignity.
Privacy
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Oversight
2/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
The older adults also should be helped to understand what the robots can do (features and functions) in order to enable them to make informed choices whether to use the robots or not.
Privacy
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
4/5Protection of personal data and private life
S - Support of privacy Practice leaders have a responsibility to put appropriate strategies in place to mitigate any risk of infringement of privacy.
Table 1
screening score · 2026-10-23
Transparency
1/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
The older adults also should be helped to understand what the robots can do (features and functions) in order to enable them to make informed choices
Privacy
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
N/A
screening score · 2026-10-23
Impact Assessment
4/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
T - Technology bene fit and risk assessment Benefits and harms, risks and burdens should be assessed. Decisions should promote the well-being of stakeholders
Table 1
screening score · 2026-10-23