Clinicians are piloting virtual‑reality sessions that recreate a deceased loved one’s image, voice, and mannerisms to treat prolonged grief. Because VR induces a powerful sense of presence, these tools could help some patients but also entrench denial, complicate consent, and invite commercial exploitation. Clear clinical protocols and posthumous‑likeness rules are needed before this spreads beyond labs.
— As AI/VR memorial tech moves into therapy and consumer apps, policymakers must set standards for mental‑health use, informed consent, and the rights of the dead and their families.
Leonora Barclay
2025.12.03
72% relevant
Both pieces treat new technologies (VR memorials in the existing idea; pet cloning in the article) as ways of 'bringing back' the dead that create strong emotional appeal but also risks—entrenching denial, commercial exploitation, consent and mental‑health harms—so the article reinforces the need for clinical, ethical and regulatory guardrails discussed in the existing idea (mentions Colossal, Viagen, and celebrity uptake).
Zoe Cunniffe
2025.10.01
100% relevant
Silvia Pizzoli’s point that people react to VR as if it’s real and the article’s discussion of using VR to simulate conversations with the deceased for prolonged grief treatment.
← Back to All Ideas