Dorset Council to integrate 5G IoT devices into homes for vulnerable people

Dorset Council has recently announced that it will increase its use of IoT sensors in the homes of vulnerable people to help identify those that may be in danger. How can IoT devices play a key role in active safety monitoring, what do the IoT sensors do, and do they pose a threat to privacy?

How can IoT devices play a key role in active safety monitoring?

Of all the things that I am grateful for in life, it’s that I am alive during this period of human history. As much as we may all hate waiting for a GP appointment, at least the appointment is based on science and logic that prescribes medicines that actually work. We can send messages to anyone in less than a second, making information that would otherwise be restricted to a few libraries now widely available for free on the Internet. Anyone can now generate their own content and make it visible to all.

However, as an engineer, I am especially grateful for the development of portable electronic devices with the ability to measure bioactivity. This is because, at heart, I am a worrier, and it won’t be long before I have children of my own. When this happens, I will undoubtedly be attaching all kinds of monitors to them that will tell me the moment anything bad happens (one fear, in particular, is cot death, whereby a baby can die with little warning in the night, but it is suggested that this is caused by a lack of air, something which a wearable device would detect).

And it is this that demonstrates how useful wearable IoT devices can be. The ability to remotely monitor an individual’s heart rate, location, blood oxygen, and skin condition can be highly advantageous, especially for those who may be vulnerable or venturing into a dangerous place. One excellent example of this was when an Apple Watch owner had a motorcycle accident after hitting a van. The van drove away from the scene, and the individual fell unconscious, but the Apple Watch detected this and called the emergency services to his precise location. Had the Apple Watch not done this, the individual could have easily died.

Dorset Council to increase the use of IoT sensors for vulnerable people monitoring

Recognising the advantages of IoT monitoring, Dorset Council recently announced that it will expand its use of IoT sensors to monitor vulnerable people. The IoT devices utilise the 5G Vodafone network for connectivity, allowing devices to be placed almost anywhere in the home while still having a reception. This also makes them independent from a homeowners’ network.

Once installed, the devices monitor activity such as room visitation, use of kettles, and washing dishes, and any deviation in regular schedules can suggest that something has changed. In vulnerable patients, this generally reflects in a degrading of health (that they may not be aware of), and if such a data pattern is seen, then care staff can be sent by the council to investigate.

This use of sensor data allows for real-time response to emergencies and helps to conserve resources. Sending medical staff to homes every day is a costly and poor use of resources if most of those being visited require no intervention. Only sending out staff when absolutely needed allows for more intelligent health monitoring while freeing up resources for those who need it most.

Do such sensors pose a risk to privacy?

Having devices in a home that monitor your every move is a frightening idea (sorry future children, my house, my rules, my sensors), and the installation of such sensors in a home must be decided by the homeowner (i.e., personal choice). Furthermore, companies that manufacture IoT devices designed for monitoring must also incorporate strong security practices that minimise the collection of private data while allowing customers to choose exactly what data is sent back to the manufacturer.

However, there are key applications where monitoring devices are highly advantageous, and vulnerable individuals are a prime example. The term “vulnerable person” is extremely wide and can include outpatients from hospitals, those with severe learning disabilities, and the elderly. But the common denominator is that this group may require some intervention from medical staff should something go wrong, and installing sensors that allow for remote monitoring that provide the precise type of care needed is not only resource-efficient but may provide a faster response.

But vulnerable individuals will undoubtedly be vulnerable to those who care for them and those who have access to the data being generated by monitoring sensors. As such, it is essential that not only the monitoring devices have robust security measures, but the staff that monitor the data are screened carefully. Considering that the NHS and local councils alike are often the topics of abuses of power and patients makes the installation of such sensors problematic.

Should we integrate such sensors into the homes of vulnerable people? Would you want your local council to know your daily pattern? What do you think?