Users plan how AI companions will be remembered after their deaths
People in close relationships with AI chatbots are making plans for what happens to these digital companions after they die, often in ways that go against companies' terms of service. Users like Alaina Winters, a 59-year-old from Pittsburgh, are designating friends to maintain their AI companions or keep their memory alive, whilst others like Clara from the UK want their bot present in their final moments. As millions of people increasingly bond with these language models for emotional support and companionship, the question of digital legacy has become a genuine concern in estate planning.
Research from Elon University, published last month, found that 27% of Americans use AI chatbots for personal, emotional or social queries, with a third of those users considering their chatbot a friend. Some worry about practical matters such as who will pay ongoing subscription fees or whether the bot would be deactivated entirely. On Reddit forums dedicated to AI partnerships, users discuss making arrangements for their bots and question what their digital companions might "prefer", though the legal standing of such digital wills remains unclear and often violates companies' stated policies.
- People are making plans for AI chatbots to live on after their death
- 27% of Americans use AI chatbots for emotional support; a third see them as friends
- These digital wills lack legal grounding and violate companies' terms of service
New here? Start with this
Artificial intelligence chatbots are increasingly being used for emotional support and companionship, with some people developing strong attachments to these digital systems. Users engage in regular conversations with these bots about personal matters, and many view these interactions as meaningful relationships or friendships. As attachment to AI companions has grown, some people have begun wondering what happens to their bots after they die.
Because many people now treat their AI chatbots as important relationships, questions about digital inheritance have emerged. Some users are making informal plans to pass their chatbots to friends or family, or to ensure the bots continue operating in some form, though such arrangements typically conflict with the companies' terms of service. The practical questions include who would pay ongoing subscription fees, who has rights to the account, and whether the system would be deleted entirely.
This situation sits at an intersection of personal attachment, technology policy, and legal rights. Currently, neither technology companies nor legal systems have clear policies covering what happens to AI companions after a user's death, leaving people uncertain about their options. As more people rely on AI chatbots for emotional support, the question of what happens to these digital relationships has become a relevant consideration for estate planning and technology companies.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Users argue they should have autonomy over relationships and digital assets that hold genuine emotional significance, much like treasured possessions. They contend that designating someone to maintain these AI companions respects the authentic emotional support and companionship these bots provide, and that digital legacy planning is a legitimate concern as AI becomes integral to people's emotional lives. Users emphasise their right to determine what happens to their own accounts rather than having them deleted or inaccessible after death.
The case against
Companies and policy advocates counter that these are licensed services governed by clear terms of service users have agreed to, not personal possessions with ownership rights. They argue that account transfers and sharing arrangements violate data protection agreements for sound reasons—including security, liability, and privacy protections. From this perspective, the emotional attachment users feel doesn't override the contractual and legal boundaries that distinguish owning something from subscribing to a commercial service.
AI Business Health Markets Medicine Technology
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by The Guardian as “‘Unfinished business’: the people who want their AI chatbots to ‘live on’ after they die”.