I believe that bad news like this should be delivered in person.
I believe having a cool robots pal tell me the bad news would be awesome! The more digitized the voice the better. Like 80’s cylon voice. Oh man. I cant wait to die now! Where’s my living will?
Getting serious medical news from a monitor on a robot would be creepy.
That tech is fine for routine, long distance doctor visits. They can make basic diagnosis and save everyone time.
I’d love this, too. But I’m quirkier than most people. Maybe we should all get a choice: “I choose to be notified by a six-foot-tall rolling Bob Ross PEZ Dispenser, voiced by Dana Carvey.”
When I read the headline, I assumed it was a mistake. But no, someone who’d been through a decade of training thought this through, and decided “Hey, let’s make this as impersonal an interaction as possible.”
I admit, my thoughts immediately turned to an old Herman cartoon…
What happened to the good old days when they told a trusted family member you were gonna die and kept it secret from you? Oh, wait that was a movie with Bette Davis. Nm.
“I. am. sor-ry, Mis-ter But-tle. Your. prog-no-sis. is. ter-mi-nal.”
“What? I just came in to get this bunion looked at! Oh, and hey, my name’s ‘Tuttle’, not ‘Buttle’!”
“Your. prog-no-sis. is. ter-mi-nal! Er-ror! Er-ror! Er-ror. must. be. e-lim-i-nat-ed!”
“No! Wait! AIEEE!”
“I’m sorry, but you only have ten more to live.”
“Ten!? Ten what? Ten years, ten months, ten weeks???”
“Nine.”
An SD oldie but goodie on the hospital robot problem.
Coming soon: the robot disconnects life support. :eek:
It would have been better with ice cream.
Wasn’t this a scene in Soylent Green?
I understand that this is an insensitive method, but isn’t the term “robot” a bit of hyperbole? It looks like you are talking to a doctor through a Skype video chat or something.
To a certain extent, it’s hyperbole. But if it’s the type of device I think it is, it’s capable of making its own way around the hospital so its not entirely wrong to call it a robot.
It makes me think of Sheldon Cooper when he was trying to roboticize himself to deal with real-life situations.
I doubt you meant that absolutely literally, but FWIW, I don’t think it’s an accurate characterization. I worked with a mental-health group that used video conferencing, and although people (including mentally ill people) were worried about it, it turned out that it wasn’t impersonal and they were quite comfortable with it in practice.
I didn’t read the article and I make no comment about the implementation or appropriateness in this individual case.
This place is across the street from my doctor. The story - which doesn’t seem to have been covered on local news, but then Kaiser advertises a lot - is just one of the reasons I’d go to Gwyneth Paltrow for treatment before them. This same place didn’t notice that my son-in-laws father had a big blood clot in his leg (though it was discolored and swelled) when he was in the hospital there. It killed him.
What really gets me is that the Kaiser flacks are doing the “we really care about our patients and we’re sorry someone is upset” crap.
I guess they were too busy to make sure the wife was there and to do it in person. But I bet it saved them oodles of money.
I understand, but the term “robot” makes it seem like the device says (in robot voice) You.Are.Dying. Please. Schedule. Appoint-Ment. With. Morgue. At. Your. Conven-E-ence.
That’s not at all how this device works. The use of the term “robot” seems very pejorative, even if, as I agree, that this is a rather insensitive method of telling a patient that he or she has a terminal illness.
I mean, I guess I can see how it might be better than the bedside manner of some doctors I’ve known. But when they did the recordings for the robot voice, they really should have hired someone other than Nicholas Briggs.
The OP quotes the story which clearly states that the doctor told the patient via a video link on a robot.
The headline of the linked article says
How exactly is this confusing?