The Surveillance State of Care: Love and Loyalty in the Digital Age

The number of adult children caring for their aging parents is increasing, raising concerns about how far is too far when it comes to monitoring loved ones’ lives. Technology offers a tempting solution to the caregiving crisis, but beneath its surface lies a complex web of ethics, power dynamics, and the risk of eroding autonomy.

The Apple Watch’s fall detection feature, which alerted paramedics after my mother fell on an icy sidewalk, is one example of technology touted as a silver bullet for caregiving. While these gadgets provide a safety net, they also raise questions about who gets to decide what’s best for whom – and whether our well-meaning efforts might actually be doing more harm than good.

Almost 59 million Americans now care for an adult over 50, with one-third of those caregivers shouldering the dual burden of caring for their parents and children simultaneously. This daunting task leaves families feeling overwhelmed and exhausted, leading many to turn to technology as a way to gain peace of mind.

However, this approach has its costs. Wendy Rogers, director of the Human Factors and Aging Lab at the University of Illinois, cautions that good communication is essential in navigating these complex issues. Yet conversations around caregiving often center on solutions rather than relationships – with technology serving as a convenient substitute for meaningful dialogue.

The “age-tech” industry promises everything from healthcare gadgets like the Hero Smart Pill Dispenser to more futuristic devices like ElliQ’s social robot. These innovations reflect a troubling assumption: that our loved ones require constant surveillance and monitoring to remain safe.

But what if this approach is misguided? What if, in our zeal to protect our aging parents, we’re inadvertently creating a culture of suspicion and distrust – one where family members are more concerned with policing each other’s lives than building genuine connections?

Rogers suggests that the key lies in approaching these issues as “care partners” rather than caregivers. By starting conversations early and maintaining an open dialogue about what works (and what doesn’t), we can create a shared understanding of our loved ones’ needs – and avoid the pitfalls of over-reliance on technology.

There’s no one-size-fits-all solution to this problem, as Rogers notes: “Sometimes it’s technology, sometimes it’s not.” As we navigate the complex landscape of caregiving, perhaps the most important question we should be asking ourselves is: what does love look like in the age of smartwatches and surveillance cameras?

Reflecting on my own family’s experiences with caregiving, I’m struck by the tension between our desire to support our loved ones and the need to respect their autonomy. Ultimately, it may not be about finding a single solution or gadget – but about creating spaces for genuine connection and communication that honor both our love and our loyalty.