Robot Companionship: Becoming Emotionally Vulnerable to a Machine

Kageyama, Yuri. “Robots Offer Devotion, No Strings Attached.” The Japan Times. The Japan Times Ltd., 23 April 2004. Web. 21 April 2010 <http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20040423b4.html>.

Read this newspaper

In his commentary, Yuri Kageyama discusses the use of robots as companions for patients with dementia and other disabilities. According to him, the ideal results would be "huge savings in medical costs, a reduced burden on families and caretakers, and better health for old and sick people." He quotes Russell Bodoff, executive director at the Center For Aging Services Technologies in Washington, "If you look 30 years out, we have what I call a global crisis in front of us, that we will have many more aging people than we could ever deal with." Toshiyo Tamura, professor at the Insitute for Longevity Services, adds to the argument by saying that using robots in therapy is better than using animals, stating that "robots are more sanitary, they don't bite or cause allergies, and there is no need to feed them anything more than power." However, Kageyama points out that the idea of children and older people becoming emotionally attached to machines bothers many people. After citing several examples of successful use of robots, Yuri raises important questions about the risks. He relates one instance where NEC Technologies Systems lent a robot to a family for research. When the robot had to be removed temporarily for an upgrade, the school-aged child in the family cried so much that the family refused to accept the robot again. Kageyama sums up his reservations by quoting John Jordan, principle at the consulting company, Cap Gemini, as saying, "Humans are very good at attributing emotions to things that are not people. Many, many moral questions will arise.'

Yuri Kageyama's commentary is credible because he quotes several experts in the field of interactive robotics. He provides informed arguments on both sides of the controversial issue surrounding the use of robots as companions. While it is evident from some examples Kageyama gives that interactive robots meet a very real need for many sick and elderly patients, it is also evident that there are drawbacks and serious risks to human-robot relationships. For those contemplating the wisdom of the use of robots in therapy, Kageyama's article is worth reading. He spells out the benefits and the risks of human attachment to robots, with an emphasis on the risks. If patients can get extremely attached to today's robotic companions which are fairly basic, only able to do simple household chores, remind patients to take their medicine, and provide minimal companionship; one can only imagine how emotionally attached patients will get to robots in the future as the robots become more sophisticated and life-like. What effect will that kind of attachment have on the patient's emotional well-being? What effect will it have on the patient's ability to relate to other humans? How will the patient react when the robot breaks or is taken away? What effect will the availability of robots in general have on the rest of society? Should computer scientists develop something just because they have the technological ability to do so or should they take into account the unintended consequences? These are serious issues and Yuri Kageyama's article is thought provoking.