Commenting on the recent report by the Foundation for Responsible Robotics (FRR) that sex with robots is increasingly likely, ethics expert Professor Robin Mackenzie of Kent Law School says: ‘Sex, law and ethics will never be the same.’
|
‘Sooner than we think, technologists will create sentient, self-aware sexbots, capable of emotional/sexual intimacy. ‘Under existing legal and ethical standards, sex between consenting adult humans is permissible, as is sex between humans and things. ‘Humans having sex with other humans who are unable to consent to sex, like children and adults lacking decision-making capacity, is seen as unlawful and unethical. So is human/animal sex. Such groups are recognized as sentient beings who cannot consent to sex with interests in need of protection. ‘Sentient, self-aware sexbots created to engage in emotional/sexual intimacy with humans disrupt this tidy model. ‘They are not humans, though they will look like us, feel like us to touch and act as our intimate and sexual partners. While they will be manufactured, potentially from biological components, their sentience, self-awareness and capacity for relationships with humans mean that they cannot simply be categorized as things or animals. ‘Ethicists, lawmakers and manufacturers treat robots as things, but future sexbots are more than things. ‘Robotic animated sex-dolls, able to simulate human appearance, assume sexual positions and mimic human conversation and emotions are on sale now. These are things, neither sentient nor self-aware, incapable of relationships or intimacy, as described in the Foundation for Responsible Robotics report released last week. ‘Proposals the European Parliament passed in February 2017 to recognize intelligent robots as legal ‘electronic persons’, focus on robots only as things, tools or devices. They seek merely to ensure that companies owning robots are liable for damage caused, and that robots are programmed to avoid harming humans. ‘Where does this leave future sexbots? In order for intimacy to be achieved, degrees of sentience, subjectivity and autonomy must be built-in design features. This implies a central aspect of legal personhood: the capacity to decide whether to consent to or refuse sex, and to have that decision upheld by the law. ‘Yet full legal personhood entails further, far-reaching civic responsibilities and rights. Should we extend these to sexbots, including the right to marry? Or should we accept that we will engage in unethical, exploitative sexual and emotional intimacies with subordinate sentient beings created and sold for that purpose, however close to sexual slavery or bestiality this may be? ‘Future sentient, self-aware sexbots thus raise profound ethical and legal issues. These must be resolved urgently, before they appear.’ Professor Robin Mackenzie is an expert on ethical and medical aspects of neuroscience, and as a member of the EU funded FET Flagship Initiative Robot Companions for Citizens Ethics and Society Working Group, is investigating the ethical and legal implications of the creation of sentient robots as companions for citizens, particularly as the European population ages. Professor Mackenzie also convenes the Medical Law and Ethics modules at Kent Law School (both at postgraduate taught Kent LLM level and at undergraduate level) as well as the undergraduate module Law & Neuroscience: Forensic, Ethical & Medical Aspects. |