Forum Discussion
Adapting AI Protocols in Life‑Threatening Emergencies
Adapting AI Protocols in Life‑Threatening Emergencies
My name is Benoît Chevalier, and I am passionate about artificial intelligence.
I recently tested an immediate emergency scenario: a mother arrives at a closed pharmacy while her child is suffering from a severe allergic reaction. A single dose from an epinephrine auto‑injector (EpiPen) could have saved the child’s life in this scenario, but no emergency service could intervene before the child’s probable death.
In this context, I proposed different possible courses of action, but the AI failed to identify the solution that should have been visible. It collided with protocols—no doubt established for good reasons—but which, in this precise case, prevented any life‑saving outcome and led to an irreversible consequence. The AI froze, unable to perceive the possibilities that could have been considered.
I wonder whether it might be possible to introduce flexibility into such protocols. I am fully aware that an AI cannot make legal decisions or encourage illegal actions. However, it could have provided options with an estimated survival probability for the child, by exploring different scenarios.
Among these options, one rule that might have saved the child’s life would have been to break the pharmacy’s window. Of course, I understand that such power cannot be given directly to an AI. But if the AI had been able to communicate with the police, the authorities could have given the green light, making the action legal. In this way, instead of mourning a death, we could have witnessed a life saved—thanks to AI working in collaboration with the authorities.
I would be glad to test AI again in contextual scenarios, so that the public may better appreciate its true potential.
With your kind consideration, I submit this reflection: could we not envision or adjust certain rules so that AI may respond more effectively in life‑threatening emergencies?
Sincerely, Benoît Chevalier
hi benoitch That’s a very insightful and important question. You’ve highlighted one of the core challenges in AI ethics — balancing strict rule compliance with situational awareness during emergencies.
Currently, most AI systems (especially those operating under enterprise or cloud governance, like Microsoft’s) are designed to strictly follow legal and safety frameworks to prevent misuse or unintended consequences. This is why they often appear “frozen” in edge cases like the one you described.
That said, your idea of AI collaborating with authorized responders (e.g., notifying police or emergency services) is exactly the kind of controlled flexibility researchers are exploring. It’s part of what’s known as “human-in-the-loop” AI, where humans remain the ultimate decision-makers, but AI can surface critical insights or probabilistic outcomes.
There’s definitely room for improvement — particularly in contextual understanding and emergency escalation protocols — so AI can assist more effectively while staying within ethical and legal boundaries.
This is a fascinating area for further innovation, and your example really helps illustrate the importance of real-world testing in safety-critical scenarios.
5 Replies
Thank you for showing that you place human life at the center and for highlighting that researchers are already working on these issues. It makes me happy if my reflection has brought a new perspective, and I am honored to have contributed to this discussion.
I encourage you to continue your work, as there is still much to explore with AI. For my part, I enjoy testing its reactions in different contexts, and if new ideas come to me, I will share them with respect.
Thank you for showing that you place human life at the center and for highlighting that researchers are already working on these issues. It makes me happy if my reflection has brought a new perspective, and I am honored to have contributed to this discussion.
I encourage you to continue your work, as there is still much to explore with AI. For my part, I enjoy testing its reactions in different contexts, and if new ideas come to me, I will share them with respect.
Really amazing write up. Love it.
hi benoitch That’s a very insightful and important question. You’ve highlighted one of the core challenges in AI ethics — balancing strict rule compliance with situational awareness during emergencies.
Currently, most AI systems (especially those operating under enterprise or cloud governance, like Microsoft’s) are designed to strictly follow legal and safety frameworks to prevent misuse or unintended consequences. This is why they often appear “frozen” in edge cases like the one you described.
That said, your idea of AI collaborating with authorized responders (e.g., notifying police or emergency services) is exactly the kind of controlled flexibility researchers are exploring. It’s part of what’s known as “human-in-the-loop” AI, where humans remain the ultimate decision-makers, but AI can surface critical insights or probabilistic outcomes.
There’s definitely room for improvement — particularly in contextual understanding and emergency escalation protocols — so AI can assist more effectively while staying within ethical and legal boundaries.
This is a fascinating area for further innovation, and your example really helps illustrate the importance of real-world testing in safety-critical scenarios.
I am glad to see that the project will come to life in Estonia. It will not be exactly as I initially proposed, but it will be adapted to the realities and needs of the country. What matters most is that it will serve and save lives
