hoto by Vitaly Gariev on Unsplash
This Alzheimer Europe discussion paper looks at how technology is used by and for people living with dementia, and what that means for rights, everyday life, and inclusion. It was created jointly by the European Working Group of People with Dementia and the European Dementia Carers Working Group, bringing lived experience to the centre of the conversation. The paper is not anti‑technology; instead, it asks how we can use technology in ways that support autonomy, dignity, and connection rather than causing exclusion or harm.
What Did the Working Group Discover?
The working groups identified eight key issue areas about technology and dementia, framed as “points for reflection” rather than rigid rules. These cover: the value and limits of technology, dementia as a progressive condition, shifting responsibility for tech use, stigma and stereotyping, equal access, involvement of people with dementia, overreliance on technology, and the balance between protection and autonomy. Across these themes, they highlight that technology can support memory, safety, communication, and independence, but can also increase surveillance, isolation, and inequality if not designed and used ethically. They stress that context matters: how, when, where, why and by whom technology is used often makes the difference between empowerment and restriction.
Why Does This Matter for Dementia Inclusive Design?
Dementia inclusive design is about making environments, services, and systems work with people living with dementia, recognising dementia as a disability and a human rights issue. Technology is now built into many parts of life; banking, transport, health care, communication and often there is no realistic non‑digital option. When these systems are not designed inclusively, people with dementia can be structurally excluded, which the paper names as a form of discrimination that must be challenged. Inclusive design must therefore address both the physical and digital environment: interfaces, authentication steps, data practices, and backup options all shape whether someone can participate in everyday life. The paper connects this directly to “reasonable accommodation” in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, arguing that mainstream technologies and public services must be adapted to meet the needs and wishes of people with dementia, not the other way around.
What Can You Take Away? Implementation and Action
To turn these ideas into real change in dementia inclusive design, the paper points towards several practical areas for action. It calls for technology to be designed with dementia as a progressive syndrome in mind. Interfaces should be simple, intuitive, and forgiving, avoiding heavy dependence on memory‑demanding steps like PINs, complex passwords, QR codes, or multi‑factor authentication. As needs change over time, systems should allow care partners to gradually take over some functions while still respecting the rights, preferences, and privacy of the person living with dementia. Alongside this, there is a need for technologies that require little active input, especially for people in more advanced stages or those who live alone, so that support does not disappear just when it is most needed.
The paper also stresses that we must actively reduce stigma and structural barriers. This means letting go of the assumption that age or dementia automatically equals a lack of technological ability, and instead offering support and training to anyone who needs it. Essential services such as banking, transport ticketing, and health portals should be designed so they can be used without advanced digital skills, with clear, non‑patronising instructions that respect people’s dignity. At the same time, non‑digital and low‑tech options must remain in place so people are not excluded when technology fails, is inaccessible, or simply not what they choose to use. A further area for action is building in access and sustainability from the outset. Developers and policy makers need to consider how technologies will be funded so that people with dementia are not priced out of tools that could meaningfully support their daily lives. Long‑term support and compatibility should be planned in, with as few confusing or disruptive updates as possible, to avoid situations where familiar devices suddenly become difficult or impossible to use. Central to all of this is co‑design with lived experience. People with dementia and care partners should be involved in setting priorities, testing prototypes, and deciding whether a technology is genuinely useful and acceptable in real life. Their input should be broad and diverse, reflecting different ages, cultures, genders, languages, and living situations, so that solutions are not tailored to only a narrow slice of the population. The paper also highlights the importance of planning for failure and ensuring a human backup. It assumes that power cuts, outages, and cyber incidents will happen, and argues that we must keep human and low‑tech safety nets such as landlines, paper processes, and supportive neighbours. This is framed within the idea of interdependency: everyone relies on others at different points in life, and presenting this as a shared human reality helps to reduce stigma for people with dementia.
The paper emphasises the need to balance protection and autonomy. While people should be safeguarded from scams, data misuse, and digital harms, this should not come at the cost of their right to take reasonable risks and make meaningful choices about their own lives. Carer partners need guidance to navigate difficult decisions when responsibility for technology use shifts, especially when a person’s wishes are not fully known or when new technologies appear that were not discussed in earlier planning.
This video comes from an outside source. While we've found it helpful and relevant to dementia-inclusive environmental design, we don't create or manage the content. Please note this video is approximately an hour and a half in length.
The Critical Messages
The discussion paper’s most powerful messages for dementia inclusive technology and design are:
Technology can help, but it cannot replace human relationships. Devices may support safety and independence, but they cannot provide a hug, hold someone’s hand, or be present at the end of life.
Dementia is a disability, and technology must align with human rights. Reasonable accommodation is a legal and ethical requirement; systems that leave people with dementia behind are discriminatory.
One‑size‑fits‑all solutions do not work. People experience dementia differently and have different abilities, histories, and values; technology must be adaptable and personalised.
Overreliance on tech is risky for everyone, especially for people with dementia. Societies need robust human and low‑tech alternatives, particularly in crises or system failures.
Involvement from the start is essential. When people with dementia and care partners are not included in early design decisions, technologies can miss what really matters or even undermine dignity and identity.
Autonomy and protection must be held in balance. Safeguards against fraud and harm should not lead to wrapping people in “cotton wool” or removing meaningful choices from their lives.
Looking Forward
The paper calls for the next wave of dementia inclusive design to treat technology as part of a wider social and ethical ecosystem, not as a stand‑alone solution. This means aligning tech development with broader values like social connection, respect for ageing, environmental sustainability, diversity, and interdependence. For people working in design, care, policy, or tech, the challenge is to move from occasional consultation toward genuine partnership with people living with dementia and their care partners. It also means pushing large companies, public bodies, and developers to embed rights, accessibility, and affordability into every stage of the technology lifecycle, from concept to deployment and long‑term support.
Ultimately, dementia inclusive design in the digital age means repeatedly asking, “Does this technology genuinely help this person live the life they value, with dignity and connection?”, and being willing to redesign, remove, or replace it, whenever the truthful answer is no.
Reference
European Working Group of People with Dementia (EWGPWD), European Dementia Carers Working Group (EDCWG), and Alzheimer Europe. Discussion paper and guidelines for the ethical use of technology for and by people with dementia. December 2025. https://www.alzheimer-europe.org/sites/default/files/2026-01/2026-01_alzheimer_europe_discussion_paper_on_the_use_of_technology.pdf
Want to learn more about dementia-inclusive environmental design? Explore our Resource Hub for practical examples and current research on creating supportive home and care environments: https://design.dementia.utas.edu.au/page/512/for-educators