Dr Tania Moerenhout1
1Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka/University Of Otago, Ōtepoti Dunedin, New Zealand
Biography:
Tania Moerenhout is a general practitioner and Lecturer at the Bioethics Centre of the University of Otago in Ōtepoti Dunedin, Aotearoa New Zealand. She graduated as a general practitioner in Belgium in 2009 and completed a PhD in philosophy in 2019 at Ghent University before moving to New Zealand in 2020. Her research interests are situated in the field of digital health ethics, with a specific interest in the ethics of online consultations and assistive technologies used in ageing. Tania is Chair of the WONCA (World Organisation of Family Medicine) Working Party on Ethics and Professionalism and a member of NEAC (National Ethics Advisory Committee).
Abstract:
Should we install a video camera for remote monitoring in our mother’s living room? This type of question will increasingly arise as digital assistive technologies become more widely used to support older adults to age in place. Many adults who want to age in place will be living with impairment or chronic illness. Digital assistive technologies offer the potential to improve the quality of life and reduce the socio-economic burdens of a rapidly ageing population. They come in many forms: smart home applications, fall detection sensors, wearables, and robotics. However, various ethical challenges arising from these technologies remain unsettled. The introduction of assistive technologies involves complex trade-offs between ethical values (e.g., safety versus privacy) and tensions between the interests of different stakeholders (e.g., older adults and their children). In this presentation, I will explore the paradigm shift in value prioritisation in residential care over the past three decades, as transformational models focused on person-centered, privacy-sensitive care are slowly replacing the traditional institutional model that emphasises safety and a medicalised approach to ageing. The analysis of these two contrasting approaches to residential care can lead to a better understanding of which values are prioritised in smart home technology. I argue that digital assistive technologies, by prioritising safety, face similar ethical challenges as the institutional model and risk creating a loss of privacy, lack of self-determination, further medicalisation, and increased isolation.