Corinna Klingler

The use of social robotics in care for older persons is increasingly discussed as one way of meeting emerging care needs due to scarce resources. While many potential benefits are associated with robotic care technologies, there is a variety of ethical challenges. To support steps towards a responsible implementation and use, this review develops an overview on ethical aspects of the use of social robots in care for older people from a decision-makers’ perspective. Electronic databases were queried using a comprehensive search strategy based on the key concepts of “ethical aspects”, “social robotics” and “elderly care”. Abstract and title screening was conducted by two authors independently. Full-text screening was conducted by one author following a joint consolidation phase. Data was extracted using MAXQDA24 by one author, based on a consolidated coding framework. Analysis was performed through modified qualitative content analysis. A total of 1,518 publications were screened, and 248 publications were included. We have organized our analysis in a scheme of ethical hazards, ethical opportunities and unsettled questions, identifying at least 60 broad ethical aspects affecting three different stakeholder groups. While some ethical issues are well-known and broadly discussed our analysis shows a plethora of potentially relevant aspects, often only marginally recognized, that are worthy of consideration from a practical perspective. The findings highlight the need for a contextual and detailed evaluation of implementation scenarios. To make use of the vast knowledge of the ethical discourse, we hypothesize that decision-makers need to understand the specific nature of this discourse to be able to engage in careful ethical deliberation.

Die Forderung nach einem Mehr an Partizipation ist allgegenwärtig. Dies gilt auch für die Gesundheitsforschung bzw. die Entwicklung und Regulierung neuer Gesundheitstechnologien. Mit Partizipation sind viele Hoffnungen verbunden, darunter die Demokratisierung und Bedürfnisorientierung von Entscheidungsprozessen. Häufig bleibt jedoch unklar, wie sich Beteiligung verantwortungsvoll ausgestalten lässt. Offen ist beispielsweise, wie mit Zugangsbarrieren oder Machtgefällen umgegangen werden soll. Die Beiträge dieses Bandes beleuchten die theoretischen Grundlagen einer Ethik der Partizipation, geben aber auch Hinweise zur verantwortungsvollen Umsetzung aus der Praxis.

Background The shortage of skilled healthcare workers, intensified by demographic change, has stimulated interest in robotic solutions for elderly care. While assistive robots typically perform practical tasks, socially assistive robots (SARs) are increasingly taking on communicative and relational roles, raising ethical concerns. Critics fear that SARs will disrupt the professional caregiver–client relationship and replace, rather than complement, human workers. Aim This study explores how SARs influence the professional care relationships and the professional self-understanding. Research design A qualitative interpretive study design. Participants and research context Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we analyzed twelve semi-structured interviews with professional caregivers experienced in using SARs in Germany and four additional interviews with stakeholders involved in their development and implementation (2023–2024). Ethical considerations The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Potsdam (No. 84/2022). Results Caregivers initially feared that SARs would replace the relational and emotional dimensions of care. However, practical experience changed their perspective. Instead of seeing SARs as substitutes, caregivers came to view them as part of a triadic care model involving the caregiver, the client, and the robot. This model reinforces the central role of caregivers in integrating SARs while maintaining emotional and relational care. SARs were accepted as tools to reduce physical workload, but caregivers emphasized that emotional support and relationship-building must remain human tasks. Conclusion Using SARs reshapes the perspective of caregivers, fostering a triadic relationship in which they remain central. They act as mediators, ensuring that SARs function as supportive tools rather than substitutes. Caregivers set ethical boundaries, prioritizing human empathy and relational care. This evolving role highlights the continued importance of the human presence in care, even as robotic technologies advance.

Recently, individualized or personalized medicine (PM) has become a buzz word in the academic as well as public debate surrounding health care. However, PM lacks a clear definition and is open to interpretation. This conceptual vagueness complicates public discourse on chances, risks and limits of PM. Furthermore, stakeholders might use it to further their respective interests and preferences. For these reasons it is important to have a shared understanding of PM. In this paper, we present a sufficiently precise as well as adequate definition of PM with the potential of wide acceptance

Die Notwendigkeit guter Arzt-Patienten-Kommunikation für eine angemessene Behandlung und für die Ausübung der Patientenselbstbestimmung ist bekannt. In interkulturell-mehrsprachigen Situationen, in denen ein kommunikationsintensiver Aushandlungsprozess besonders notwendig ist, erhält die Qualität der Verständigung besondere Bedeutung, so dass der Einsatz qualifizierter Dolmetschender hier ethisch geboten ist. Er stellt Ärzte und Ärztinnen, aber auch die Dolmetschenden vor besondere, ethisch zu reflektierende Herausforderungen. Sind zudem keine qualifizierten Dolmetschenden einsetzbar, müssen Ärzte und Ärztinnen in schwierigen ethischen Abwägungsprozessen eine Entscheidung über das weitere Vorgehen treffen. Diese beiden Themen finden in der medizinethischen Literatur bisher wenig Beachtung. Anhand von Erkenntnissen aus der Forschung u. a. zum Gesprächsdolmetschen werden im Folgenden zentrale ethische Herausforderungen eines Dolmetschereinsatzes herausgearbeitet. Diskutiert werden der Bedarf sprachlicher Unterstützung, der drohende Ausschluss von Patientinnen und Patienten in gedolmetschten Gesprächen, die Beachtung der für das Dolmetschen geltenden berufsethischen Prinzipien, die Gewährleistung der Vertraulichkeit sowie die Konsequenzen interkulturellen Vermittelns. Des Weiteren wird für Ärzte und Ärztinnen, die unter nicht-idealen Bedingungen ohne qualifizierte Dolmetschende agieren müssen, erstmals ein strukturierter argumentativer Rahmen vorgestellt. Es werden neun Bewertungskriterien vorgeschlagen, anhand derer in einem Abwägungsprozess über die Eignung einer Person zum (spontanen) Dolmetschen entschieden werden kann.