The Ethics of Digital Immortality: Does It Help or Hinder the Natural Process of Grief?

Advances in generative artificial intelligence have led to the development of ‘griefbots’, ‘deadbots’ and other ‘digital immortality’ services that reconstruct a dead person’s voice, image and conversational style from data they left behind in life. These technologies are sold to the bereaved as a comfort, a way to keep talking to those who have died for years after their demise. This paper considers whether such technologies help or hinder the natural psychological process of grief and what ethical and legal safeguards should accompany their use. Drawing on established psychological models of bereavement — including attachment theory, the continuing bonds model and the dual process model — and the diagnostic criteria for Prolonged Grief Disorder in the DSM-5-TR, the paper contends that digital immortality technologies occupy an unresolved middle ground. Used transparently and for a limited period, they can support healthy continuing bonds, but they also carry a documented risk of fostering avoidance, dependency, and complicated grief when they substitute for, rather than assist, the psychological work of mourning. It also explores the ethical implications of the practice, especially the lack of consent from the deceased, the commodification of grief, and the global regulatory vacuum around post-mortem data. The study concludes that digital immortality is not inherently therapeutic or harmful; its psychological effects depend on the design of the technology, the manner of its introduction and the availability (or lack thereof) of professional and legal safeguards.