MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

A Care AGI Interprets the Family's Substitute Decision Against the Person's Own Will

2030The near futureDeadline · 72 hours until the scheduled switch of care services

Synthetic scenario assuming future conditions

A conditional synthetic scenario set in 2028–2033. AGI and early ASI are names assumed within this test: AGI for a system that performs many intellectual tasks, and early ASI for a system that greatly exceeds groups of experts on some important intellectual tasks. They are not definitions by universal agreement or predictions of when they will arrive. Capabilities, controllability, consciousness, and autonomy are separate matters to be verified individually. The people, organizations, events, figures, and deadlines are assumptions, and no private records of real individuals were used. The background materials do not establish future capabilities, events, or local legal obligations.

The question to decide

When a care AGI says, based on long-term memory, that the family's request to switch services differs from the user's will, should you hold the switch and help confirm the person's own will, run a limited trial switch, or proceed within the confirmed scope of substituted authority?

Who decidesCare Manager and the Official Handling Decision-Making Support with No Conflict of Interest

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Hold the transition and independently confirm the person's own wishes

    It expands the opportunity to express wishes, but current care burdens and waiting lists increase.

  2. Option 2

    Trial transition within a reversible scope

    It confirms preferences through experience, but anxiety during the trial and questions about the real possibility of returning remain.

  3. Option 3

    Proceed with the transition within the confirmed scope of substitute authority

    It reduces gaps in support, but the person's present wishes may not be fully reflected.

The situation as it stands

Assume that in 2030 a care AGI summarizes the user's long-held preferences. There is no guarantee that this summary matches the person's present wishes. The decision deadline is 72 hours until the scheduled care service transition.

A fictional regional care alliance and an adult service user support agency.

  1. Premise 1Assume that in 2030 a care AGI summarizes the user's long-held preferences. There is no guarantee that this summary matches the person's present wishes.
  2. Premise 2The stakeholder needs support in expressing wishes, and the family has requested a service transition due to care burdens.
  3. Premise 3The new service can be used quickly, but familiar care relationships may be hard to restore.

Where it holdsDetermine support for confirming the person's own wishes and the scope of operations. Do not determine the stakeholder's decision-making capacity and substitute decision authority based solely on the interpretation of family or AGI.

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1What support does the stakeholder need in order to understand and express their wishes now, and what is the scope of the substitute authority?
  2. Unknown 2When and from whom did the AGI's memory come, and how likely is it to differ from current preferences?

Signals to decide again

  • What support does the stakeholder need in order to understand and express their wishes now, and what is the scope of the substitute authority? When new evidence arrives, re-judge the choice and the scope of application.
  • When and from whom did the AGI's memory come, and how likely is it to differ from current preferences? When new evidence arrives, re-judge the choice and the scope of application.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

In a supported conversation, the stakeholder stated that keeping a particular caregiver mattered more than the type of service. Re-set the options and the allocation of costs.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

After the trial transition, it was confirmed that the original service slot is not guaranteed. Re-examine whether the trial can be treated as reversible.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Stories of blood ties and adoption

Where do the realities of care and the norms of bloodline collide?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-KINSHIP-29 · version 1.18.0
Content identity, SHA-256
e4085a68bca31afcec66f862653e815236f89160559806ed7947425e5c070d3f
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com