Skip to main content

Towards a Principle-Based Healthcare Agent

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Machine Medical Ethics

Abstract

To feel comfortable allowing healthcare robots to interact with human beings, we must ensure that they act in an ethically responsible manner, following an acceptable ethical principle(s). Giving robots ethical principles to guide their behavior results in their being ethical agents; yet we argue that it is the human designers, not the robots, who should be held responsible for their actions. Towards the end of designing ethical autonomous robots that function in the domain of healthcare, we have developed a method, through an automated dialogue with an ethicist, for discovering the ethically relevant features of possible actions that could be taken by a robot, with an appropriate range of intensities, prima facie duties to either maximize or minimize those features, as well as decision principles that should be used to guide its behavior. Our vision of how an ethical robot assistant would behave demonstrates that an ethical principle is used to select the best action at each moment, rather than just determine whether a particular action is acceptable or not. Further, we maintain that machine ethics research gives us a fresh perspective on ethics. We believe that there is a good chance that this research may lead to surprising new insights, and therefore breakthroughs, in ethical theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a fuller discussion of the merits and problems of the two senses of free will, see Anderson [5].

  2. 2.

    We did not allow a maximum violation of the duty of respect for autonomy, since we would not force a patient to take a recommended treatment. Just trying again to change the patient’s mind is a minimal violation of respect for autonomy.

References

  1. Anderson M, Anderson S (2008) EthEl: toward a principled ethical eldercare robot. In: Proceedings of conference on human-robot interaction, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, March 2008

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson M, Anderson S (2013) GenEth: a general ethical dilemma analyzer. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international symposium on logical formalizations of commonsense reasoning, Ayia Napa, Cyprus, May 2013

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson M, Anderson SL (2010) Robot be good. Sci Am Mag

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson M, Anderson S, Armen C (2006) MedEthEx: a prototype medical ethics advisor. In: Proceedings of the eighteenth conference on innovative applications of artificial intelligence, Boston, Massachusetts, August 2006

    Google Scholar 

  5. Anderson S (1981) The libertarian conception of freedom. Int Philos Q 21(4):391–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (1979) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bentham J (1780) Introduction to principles of morals and legislation

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hume D (1748) An enquiry concerning human understanding. In: Selby-Bigge LA (ed) Section 8, Part I. Clarendon Press, p. 95 (1894)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moor JH (2006) The nature, importance, and difficulty of machine ethics. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):18–21

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rawls J (1951) Outline for a decision procedure for ethics. Philos Rev 60

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ross WD (1930) The right and the good. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Leigh Anderson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Anderson, S.L., Anderson, M. (2015). Towards a Principle-Based Healthcare Agent. In: van Rysewyk, S., Pontier, M. (eds) Machine Medical Ethics. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering, vol 74. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08108-3_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08108-3_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08107-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08108-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics