In chapter one of the book, Digital Convergence: Better Solutions for People with Dementia, edited by Nilmini Wickramasinghe, Thu Ha Dang, Tuan Anh Nguyen, and Sasan Adibi, I examine the dual nature of digital solutions for people living with dementia, highlighting both their potential to enhance independence and the risks they pose to human rights.

Thoughtful design and genuine involvement of people living with dementia can better shape meaningful outcomes in this rapidly evolving field.

Thank you to those people living with dementia who provided their insights for this chapter. Your contribution is critical and is always welcome.

If you read it, please free to comment on this chapter here; your thoughts and questions are always welcome!​

“This chapter explores whether emerging digital technologies can advance, rather than compromise, the human rights of PLWD and the broader community. At first glance, technology presents exciting new possibilities, especially for people receiving care in community or residential aged care settings. Yet there is a real risk that these tools could intrude upon and infringe on people’s human rights. At the same time, everyday technologies, from GPS navigation in cars or smartphones, to tools like ChatGPT for writing, predictive text, or voice assistance tools like Siri, have become increasingly useful and integrated into daily life. These developments show that when thoughtfully designed and implemented, digital tools can enhance independence and convenience and potentially improve quality of life.”

Nothing About Us Without Us — Especially Not in Code

Digital technology and artificial intelligence etc are rapidly transforming the world, including dementia care. Smart homes, predictive analytics, monitoring devices and conversational AI are presented as solutions to safety concerns, workforce shortages and rising costs. The narrative is one of innovation and inevitability.

But innovation without rights is not necessarily progress — it is simply modernised paternalism.

Too often, dementia technologies are justified in the language of protection. GPS tracking prevents “wandering.” Sensors detect “risk behaviours.” Algorithms predict decline. Surveillance becomes normalised in the name of safety. Yet safety cannot override legal personhood. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) affirms equal recognition before the law, the right to live independently, and the right to freedom of expression. Technologies that quietly replace decision-making, erode privacy or default to institutional control undermine these guarantees — even when well intentioned.

A rights-based approach asks different questions. Does this technology expand autonomy or restrict it? Who controls the data? Can consent evolve over time? Does the system support decision-making, or automate its removal? When design begins with rights rather than risk, technology shifts from containment to capability.

Equally critical is who shapes innovation. Consultation is not co-design. Tokenism is not participation. The CRPD requires the active involvement of persons with disabilities in decisions that affect them. People living with dementia are not passive users or data sources; they are knowledge holders whose lived expertise can prevent deficit narratives and algorithmic stigma from being built into systems at scale. Without genuine involvement, digital ableism can spread faster than any analogue discrimination before it.

When people with dementia lead or co-lead design, priorities change. The focus moves from monitoring decline to enabling participation, from behaviour tracking to communication support, from preventing movement to enabling safe mobility and connection. Technology becomes a tool for citizenship rather than control.

The future of dementia care is being written in code. If that code reflects efficiency over dignity and prediction over participation, we will replicate old harms in new forms. If it reflects autonomy, agency and equal citizenship, digital innovation can strengthen rights rather than erode them.

Digital transformation may be inevitable. Rights violations are not. Nothing about us without us — especially not in code.

Citation: Swaffer, K. (2026). Digital Solutions for People Living with Dementia: Possibilities and Pitfalls. In T. A. Nguyen, N. Wickramasinghe, T. H. Dang, & S. Adibi (Eds.), Digital Convergence (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1–17). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003485681-1