A New Type of Grief

Reconciling the first fatal crash between two Autonomous Vehicles

Prologue

The following is Speculative Design or Design Fiction - the practice of developing prototypes that might exist in our future as a way of exploring it. This piece of Speculative Design comes in the form of a newspaper article reporting on the first fatal crash between two Autonomous Vehicles (AV). It explores how humanity might reconcile the loss of human life where no person is at fault, and the only culprit is a technology – one that is objectively safer for humanity as a whole.

With an insurmountable number of driving occasions happening each hour, day, and year; even a marginal share taken by AVs would amount to billions of trips. Are we to assume there will not be even a 1-in-a-billion chance of death from AVs? Is that even a fair expectation to set? 

So while the time and place of this article are purely speculative, the math would suggest that the incident itself is a foregone conclusion.

---

A New Type of Grief 

Friday, November 15th 2024

It is nearing 6pm and I’m standing on the side of a two lane highway outside Birmingham, Michigan with a crowd of about 50 waiting for the vigil to begin. Diane and Paul Lavigne were travelling eastbound on this road last night and Peter Agarwal was heading westbound. The reported time of impact from the vehicles’ computers was 10:39pm in the middle of the road right next to where the vigil has gathered and some debris still remains. Peter Agarwal sustained minor injuries. Diane and Paul Lavigne, both in their 70s, and described by neighbors as “the kind of people you wanted to be friends with” were killed instantly. The crowd at the vigil is mostly members of the community that knew Paul and Diane, with a few reporters  here to cover the aftermath from the first death in history where the responsibility lies solely on Autonomous Vehicles (AV).

We’ve had fatal crashes with AVs before... 

• 2018: Elaine Herzberg, a pedestrian, is struck and killed by an AV from Uber’s pilot program. Elaine was jaywalking and the driver was asleep at the wheel. 
• 2022: Usain Hussman, a driver testing out Toyota’s beta AV program, collides with a manual vehicle on the highway and is pronounced dead shortly after. The error in Toyota’s AV software misread the old divider lines that had been poorly painted over during temporary construction. 
• 2023: Yvette Klein, victim to the only fatal malfunction of LIDAR technology, was driven into oncoming traffic. The investigation, which concluded earlier this year, determined that the auto manufacturer was at fault; resulting in a $8 million payout to the victim’s family. 

… so why does this time feel different?

The difference is that this is the first instance where no one is at fault. There’s simply no one to vilify or even blame. Two AVs passed each other on a highway and one hit a patch of black ice. Despite both AVs’ best efforts towards their programming of keeping people safe, a collision still occurred leaving two people dead. How do you move on when there's no one to blame?

Both auto manufacturers involved in the incident declined to answer any questions before this article was published, only to issue brief statements that were broadly generic; giving their condolences to the family and friends of those involved, and referring to the event as “a deeply unfortunate and rare incident.” Both their statements subtly convey their longstanding message that Autonomous Systems put “the safety of a person’s life above all else.” A tagline that has appeared in numerous forms across their marketing for the past two years.

Peter Agarwal was leaving downtown after a work celebration, heading back home to his wife who was waiting up for him and a daughter who had gone to sleep hours ago. The Lavignes were travelling westbound back from their nephew’s birthday party. Family members from the party stated that Paul and Diane stayed longer than they planned and were exhausted from the evening’s festivities. As they said their goodbyes in the driveway they had promised to turn on the AV-Driving system. “They were quite tired when they left. I’d like to hope they were asleep when it happened. I’d like to hope they never woke up.” says Diane Lavigne’s sister, Ashley Thompson. 

This incident cannot turn into a case against the use of AVs. Any rational mind can look at the data and see AVs’ superiority to human drivers. These machines are not distracted, irresponsible, tired, or slow to react when compared to their human counterparts. Simply put, they save more lives than human drivers.

But from where I’m standing - in a field in Michigan - that optimism feels inappropriate to a community that has lost two of its members to a new type of grief. What they are experiencing will soon become part of everyone’s evolving idea of the new normal. People will get into their AVs very similar to how they board planes; trying to shake the irrational fear of disaster, coming to terms that it’s outside their control, and saying to themselves “it’s safer than driving.”

---

Afterword

The intention of this Speculative Design piece isn’t to rain on the parade of Autonomous Vehicles. Quite the opposite. AV has an undoubtedly bright future, with billions more being invested each year. But as AI challenges are addressed to help us achieve our collective dreams of what’s possible, EQ challenges shouldn’t be neglected – because those are the ones that can really trip up companies. With each new technological advancement made in AV, more focus and funding is given. But the societal questions need investment too.

• Who will people vilify when there’s no one to blame? And how will victims grieve when there’s no one to forgive?
• How will companies prepare society for this likely future?
• How will crashes of differing vehicle classes not turn into scandals of inequality?

AV-driven deaths are indeed statistically insignificant occurrences and edge cases. But people’s decisions are driven by emotion – not statistical data. And edge cases reshape our world on a continual basis – from the packaging of all CPG products, to how early we arrive at airports. 

So what’s at stake if this is neglected? AV’s total collapse? Certainly not. The most these edge cases can do is slow the adoption rate of AV as a whole – but in the same stroke they can cripple the companies involved in the incident who are blindsided. And in a field of promising start-ups and the giants of the tech & auto industries that is advancing rapidly – any misstep can result in being left behind. 

This article was inspired by Capgemini’s Autonomous Vehicle Report.