Recent advances in robotics have in many ways enhanced the human experience, improving medical care, providing a safer work environment and bringing novel educational interventions, for example. But the line between what we allow robots to do and where we give primacy to human activity and experience is an ethical matter that may be best addressed through policy; as yet no such policy framework exists. In this statement, we argue that, as we become more accustomed to intelligent technologies, it is worth considering the risks, as well as the benefits, that the design and everyday use of such technology may pose for our personhood – our interpretation of ourselves and others. The ubiquity of computers, robots and intelligent devices, in our working and social lives, which are increasingly designed to function as a person, indicates a need for an agreed framework supported by international legislation that would clearly delineate ethical boundaries (see Sharkey, 2008). Here, we argue for the need for such a framework, using a focus on ‘social’ robots, such as service and care robots in the workplace and home, to demonstrate the potential for robot-human conflict. It is here that design practice has the potential to greatly enhance personhood or detract from it.