In the governance of emerging technologies, ethical guidance has often relied on so-called soft law instruments--codes of conduct, guidelines, or frameworks--designed to promote responsible behavior without imposing binding legal constraints. This is partly due to the difficulty of imposing harmonized regulations across the EU, especially in a global context characterized by strong reservations expressed by other international actors, e.g. the United States of America, with regard to the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) that "unduly burdens AI innovation" (Kratsios, Sacks, and Rubio 2025) . Another reason is related to the principle, upheld in several member states such as Germany, that protects scientific freedom by constitutional law. Nevertheless, the recent trajectory of technological regulation in the European Union shows that soft law can evolve into hard law: this has been the case, notably, with the adoption of the AI Act (European Commission 2022; Terpan 2015) .

Current ethical debates on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in health care treat AI as a product of technology in three ways: First, by assessing risks and potential benefits of currently developed AI-enabled products with ethical checklists; second, by proposing ex ante lists of ethical values seen as relevant for the design and development of assisting technology, and third, by promoting AI technology to use moral reasoning as part of the automation process. Subsequently, we propose a fourth approach to AI, namely as a methodological tool to assist ethical reflection. We provide a concept of an AI-simulation informed by three separate elements: 1) stochastic human behavior models based on behavioral data for simulating realistic settings, 2) qualitative empirical data on value statements regarding internal policy, and 3) visualization components that aid in understanding the impact of changes in these variables. The potential of this approach is to inform an interdisciplinary field about anticipated ethical challenges or ethical trade-offs in concrete settings and, hence, to spark a re-evaluation of design and implementation plans. This may be particularly useful for applications that deal with extremely complex values and behavior or with limitations on the communication resources of affected persons (e.g., persons with dementia care or for care of persons with cognitive impairment). Simulation does not replace ethical reflection but does allow for detailed, context-sensitive analysis during the design process and prior to implementation. Finally, we discuss the inherently quantitative methods of analysis afforded by stochastic simulations as well as the potential for ethical discussions and how simulations with AI can improve traditional forms of thought experiments and future-oriented technology assessment.

Social robotics development for the practice of care and European prospects to incorporate these AI-based systems in institutional healthcare contexts call for an urgent ethical reflection to (re)configurate our practical life according to human values and rights. Despite the growing attention to the ethical implications of social robotics, the current debate on one of its central branches, social assistive robotics (SAR), rests upon an impoverished ethical approach. This paper presents and examines some tendencies of this prevailing approach, which have been identified as a result of a critical literature review. Based on this analysis of a representative case of how ethical reflection is being led towards social robotics, some future research lines are outlined, which may help reframe and deepen in its ethical implications.