home
radioMal Fletcher comments on social robots working in care homes.
Continued from page 2
They may be able to "sense" our emotions and even to respond in kind. Yet they cannot truly empathise, for empathy demands at the very least a shared human experience, which by definition human-substitutes don't possess.
Being a process of imagination, empathy necessitates a capacity to draw upon a palette of shared human emotions, rather than programmed or pretend versions of the same.
In fact, when psychologists see a human being displaying only manufactured emotional responses to the suffering of others, they will often see this as part of a Narcissistic Personality Disorder or an expression of sociopathy.
We must recognise that, despite our best machine designs and human intentions, entropy is always a very real danger. The introduction of social bots, whatever their bells-and-whistles technology, must be accompanied by a new culture of much more rigorous oversight.
We must never see interactions with machines as true
substitutes for human fellowship. 
Mal Fletcher is a social commentator and social futurist, global leadership speaker, broadcaster and author. He is chairman of the 
Comment
Bookmark
Tell a friend
Print version
Having worked for years as an agency nurse, across the whole spectrum of nursing practice, and from neonatal to aged care, I can already hear alarm bells ringing. On the one hand, most areas within the health profession are low-staffed, and existing staff are therefore pushed for time. This means that contact time with patients is limited. Added to this, nursing training these days takes place in the classroom, where teaching is geared towards a degree in nursing. Practical experience usually consists of working under supervision over the Christmas holiday break (if you're lucky) and is both limited and narrow in scope.
Added to this is the heavy workload of existing nursing staff, where patient contact is often impersonal and limited to the giving of medications, the carrying out of routine medical procedures, and administration of hygiene. Already there is a serious lack of empathy and human touch involved. In fact, having a meaningful conversation with a patient is often frowned upon.
If robots are introduced, workloads of staff may well be reduced, but it is highly doubtful that any time saved would be spent with patients. When you are seriously ill, simple things such as a listening ear, meaningful touch and expressions of empathy carry enormous significance. No robot is able to deliver these as effectively as a caring human being. Certainly medical robots can ease the burden on staff by carrying out rote tasks of all kinds. But we need to leave the caring and empathy to those who understand and empathize, just because they are human.