Would you really trust a robot to care for you in old age?

Rich Walker, director of Shadow Robot, the firm behind these intricate creations, quips, "We’re not trying to build Terminator." His appearance, more reminiscent of a latter-day hippy with his spectacles, long hair, and beard, belies the cutting-edge technology his company is developing. With evident pride, he outlines his firm’s foundational ethos: "We set out to build the robot that helps you, that makes your life better, your general-purpose servant that can do anything around the home, do all the housework…" Yet, beneath this seemingly simple ambition lies a far deeper, more urgent goal: to tackle one of the UK’s most pressing societal challenges – the escalating crisis in social care.

The statistics paint a stark picture. A report by the charity Skills for Care last year revealed a staggering 131,000 vacancies for adult care workers in England. Concurrently, Age UK estimates that approximately two million people aged 65 and over in England are living with unmet care needs. Looking ahead, projections for 2050 suggest that one in four people in the UK will be aged 65 or over, a demographic shift poised to place unprecedented strain on an already struggling care system. This looming crisis has prompted significant investment and discussion into "techno-solutionism," a concept that envisions technological innovations, particularly robots, as a primary answer to complex societal problems.

Indeed, the previous government committed a substantial £34m investment towards developing care robots, stating boldly in 2019 that "within the next 20 years, autonomous systems like… robots will become a normal part of our lives, transforming the way we live, work and travel." This vision, while ambitious, raises profound ethical and practical questions. Could this futuristic approach truly alleviate the care crisis, or does it risk dehumanizing a deeply personal service? More importantly, would individuals truly trust their elderly relatives, or themselves when at their most vulnerable, with what is essentially a very strong, highly programmed machine? The answer, as early trials suggest, is far from straightforward.

Japan, a nation grappling with one of the world’s most rapidly aging populations and a significant shortage of care staff, offers a compelling glimpse into a future where robots might become commonplace in care settings. A decade ago, the Japanese government initiated a programme of subsidies for robot manufacturers, encouraging the development and widespread adoption of care robots in nursing homes. Dr. James Wright, an AI specialist and visiting professor at Queen Mary University of London, embarked on a seven-month observational study to assess the efficacy and integration of these robots in a Japanese care home environment.

His study focused on three distinct types of robots. The first, HUG, developed by Fuji Corporation, presented as a highly sophisticated walking frame. Equipped with ergonomic support pads, HUG was designed to assist carers in the strenuous task of lifting residents from beds to wheelchairs or toilets, aiming to reduce physical strain on staff. The second robot, named Paro, resembled a cuddly baby seal. Its primary function was therapeutic, intended to stimulate dementia patients through tactile interaction, responding to strokes with programmed movements and sounds. The third, Pepper, was a small, humanoid robot with a friendly demeanor, capable of giving instructions and demonstrating exercises by moving its arms, thereby leading exercise classes for residents.

Dr. Wright admitted to having been swayed by some of the initial hype surrounding these innovations. "I was expecting that the robots would be easily adopted by care workers who were massively overstretched and extremely busy in their work," he recounted. "What I found was, almost the opposite." His observations revealed a stark reality: far from saving time, the robots often added to the workload of already overburdened care staff. The most significant drains on their time were the mundane tasks of cleaning and recharging the robots, and critically, troubleshooting when they malfunctioned or didn’t perform as expected.

"After several weeks the care workers decided the robots were more trouble than they were worth and used them less and less, because they were too busy to use them," Dr. Wright explained. He detailed specific instances: "HUG had to be moved around all the time to get [it] out of the residents’ way," proving cumbersome in tight spaces. Paro, despite its therapeutic intent, "caused distress to one of the residents who had become overly attached to it," highlighting unforeseen emotional complexities. Pepper, designed to lead exercises, proved impractical as "it was too short for people to see – and they couldn’t hear it properly because its voice was too high-pitched." These seemingly minor flaws collectively undermined the robots’ utility.

The developers of these robots have since responded to Dr. Wright’s findings. Fuji Corporation stated that HUG’s design has been refined to be more compact and user-friendly. Takanori Shibata, Paro’s creator, emphasized that Paro has been in use for two decades and cited trials demonstrating "clinical evidence of [its] therapeutic effects." Pepper, now under new ownership, has undergone substantial software updates. While these improvements are positive, Dr. Wright’s research underscores a crucial point: the successful integration of robots into care environments requires more than just technological advancement; it demands a deep understanding of user needs, practical constraints, and the complex human element of care.

Despite these early challenges, Rich Walker of Shadow Robot remains steadfast in his conviction that robots have a vital role to play in care. He argues that the next generation of robots, learning from these initial trials, will be far more capable and integrated. This sentiment is echoed by Professor Praminda Caleb-Solly of the University of Nottingham, who is actively working to bridge the gap between laboratory innovation and real-world application. "We are trying to get these robots out of the labs into the real world," she asserts. To facilitate this, she established Emergence, a network designed to connect robot manufacturers with businesses and, crucially, with the elderly individuals who will ultimately use these technologies. This collaborative approach seeks to gather direct feedback on what seniors truly desire from care robots.

The insights gathered are diverse and illuminating. Some users express a preference for robots with intuitive voice interaction and a non-threatening, even "cute," appearance. However, many requests delve into practical functionality: adaptability to changing needs, self-charging capabilities, and autonomous cleaning. As one participant succinctly put it, "We don’t want to look after the robot – we want the robot to look after us." This highlights a fundamental expectation: robots should simplify, not complicate, the lives of their users and carers.

Back in the UK, businesses like home care provider Caremark are also actively testing the waters. They have been trialling Genie, a small voice-activated robot, with some of their clients in Cheltenham. Anecdotal evidence suggests varied reactions. One man with early-onset dementia reportedly enjoyed asking Genie to play Glenn Miller songs, finding comfort and entertainment in the interaction. However, Michael Folkes, Caremark’s director, describes overall reactions as "like Marmite," indicating a significant divide between those who embrace Genie and those who remain unconvinced. Crucially, Folkes stresses that these devices are not intended to replace human carers but to augment their capabilities. "We’re trying to build a future where carers have more time to care," he clarifies, suggesting robots could handle routine tasks, freeing up human staff for more complex, personal interactions.

The technical hurdles remain substantial, particularly in replicating human dexterity. In the Shadow Robot Company’s lab, Rich Walker emphasizes this challenge. "For the robot to be useful, it needs to have the same ability to interact with the world as [a] human does," he explains. "And for that it needs human-like dexterity." The metallic and plastic robot hand he demonstrates is undeniably nimble, equipped with 100 sensors and possessing the strength and flexibility akin to a human hand. It can smoothly, quickly, and precisely touch each finger to its thumb, even forming an ‘OK’ sign. Remarkably, it can even solve a Rubik’s Cube with one hand.

Yet, as Walker admits, it is still a long way from mastering more delicate human tasks, such as skillfully using a pair of scissors or carefully picking up small, fragile objects. "The way we use a pair of scissors is quite mind-blowing when you think about it," he muses. "If you try and analyse what happens, you’re using your sense of touch in subtle and precise ways and receiving feedback, which makes you adjust the way you cut. How do you tell a robot how to do that?" This intricate interplay of proprioception, tactile feedback, and adaptive motor control represents a formidable challenge for robotics engineers.

To address this, Walker’s team, in collaboration with 26 other engineering firms, is part of the Robot Dexterity Programme. This ambitious project, funded by the government agency Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA), embraces a "high risk, high reward" philosophy, supporting scientific research with the potential to transform society. Professor Jenny Read, the project’s leader, reveals that they are drawing inspiration from biological systems, studying how animals move to inform a complete rethinking of robot design, not just for hands. "One of the very striking things about animal bodies is their grace and efficiency," she observes. "Evolution has ensured that, in fact. I think gracefulness really is a form of efficiency."

Further pushing the boundaries of biomimicry, Guggi Kofod, a Danish engineer turned entrepreneur, is developing artificial muscles for robots at his firm, Pliantics. These are designed to replace traditional motors, offering a more compliant and nuanced form of movement. Still in its early stages, the firm has achieved a significant breakthrough in finding a durable material that mimics muscle contraction and extension when an electric current is applied. Kofod’s motivation is deeply personal: "Several people near me died from dementia very recently," he shares. "I see from the people who are caring for dementia patients, and it is very challenging. So, if we could build systems that help them to not be scared, and that help them live at least a decent level of life… That’s incredibly motivating for me." His company is collaborating with Shadow Robot on the ARIA project, aiming to develop a human-sized robotic hand with artificial muscles, capable of a more precise and delicate grip. The ultimate goal is for this hand to detect subtle pressure changes and know precisely when to stop squeezing, much like the sensitive skin on human fingertips.

Despite the technological promise, Dr. Wright, who observed the robots in Japan, voices a critical final concern: the potential impact on human carers if robots become widely adopted. "The only way that economically you can make this work is to pay the care workers less and have much larger care homes, which are standardised to make it easy for robots to operate in," he argues. "As a result, there would be more robots taking care of people, with care workers being paid a minimum wage to service the robots, which is the opposite of this vision that robots are going to give time back to care workers to spend quality time with residents, to talk." This dystopian vision highlights the risk of dehumanizing care and reducing human carers to mere robot technicians, a stark contrast to the stated goal of enhancing human connection.

However, other experts maintain a more optimistic outlook. Gopal Ramchurn, a professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Southampton and CEO of Responsible AI, believes the industry is poised for immense growth. "It’s going to be a huge industry, given the deficit we have in the workforce right now. The demand for carers as our population ages will be huge," he asserts. Ramchurn’s company focuses on ensuring AI systems are safe, reliable, and trustworthy, recognizing the ethical imperative. He points to developments like Elon Musk’s Optimus humanoid robot, which performed tasks like serving drinks at a Tesla event, as clear indicators that advanced robotics are not a distant dream but an imminent reality. "We are trying to anticipate that future, before the big tech companies come in and deploy these things without asking us what we think about them," he adds. The urgency, he argues, lies in developing appropriate regulations and ethical frameworks now to ensure that robots work for humanity, rather than the other way around. "We need to be ready for that future." The debate is not whether robots will enter our care homes, but how we will ensure they do so ethically, effectively, and with humanity at their core.

Additional reporting: Florence Freeman. Top image credit: Jodi Lai/BBC (Picture is illustrative and not representative of any specific robots in the article)
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. You can now sign up for notifications that will alert you whenever an InDepth story is published – click here to find out how.