Is consenting to digital duplication ethically distinctive? A bioethical analysis

Digital duplication refers to the creation of interactive systems that simulate individuals, whether living or deceased and has become a widely discussed topic in the ethics of artificial intelligence. One central issue concerns the feasibility of consent to digital duplication, with some authors arguing that digital duplicates raise unique challenges for consent. Drawing on established debates in bioethics, this paper questions that uniqueness thesis by showing that the difficulties associated with digital duplication largely mirror well-known issues in the medical domain. Building on this analysis, it argues that the challenges posed by digital duplication do not genuinely undermine consent and presents consent models from the bioethical literature that are informative for the ethics of digital duplication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Ethics
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2026-111931
Primary Topic
Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Is consenting to digital duplication ethically distinctive? A bioethical analysis

Daniel Villiger, Atay Kozlovski
3 links
Journal of Medical Ethics
Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
article

Is consenting to digital duplication ethically distinctive? A bioethical analysis

Daniel Villiger, Atay Kozlovski
article en

Abstract

Digital duplication refers to the creation of interactive systems that simulate individuals, whether living or deceased and has become a widely discussed topic in the ethics of artificial intelligence. One central issue concerns the feasibility of consent to digital duplication, with some authors arguing that digital duplicates raise unique challenges for consent. Drawing on established debates in bioethics, this paper questions that uniqueness thesis by showing that the difficulties associated with digital duplication largely mirror well-known issues in the medical domain. Building on this analysis, it argues that the challenges posed by digital duplication do not genuinely undermine consent and presents consent models from the bioethical literature that are informative for the ethics of digital duplication.

Journal of Medical Ethics
University of Zurich (CH), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon