And weighed the utilitarian health resources that may be gained within the bond:

- Social support is important for health outcomes

- This person provides socioemotional support

- But this person is also a 'net cost' sometimes

- Thus, is maintaining bond with person for socioemotional health resources worth the effort?

- Would I be better off without the effort?

Or is this person a rope I'm holding as I'm falling, & though this rope is burning my hands at least I'll land on my feet once [current life event] is over thanks to this person?

Is there another person who could efficiently provide the same interpersonal health resources via social interaction?

How easy/difficult would it be for me to form a bond with another interpersonal interaction partner based on my:

- skin tone,

- race,

- sex,

- sexuality,

- age,

- income,

- thinness,

- body type,

- # of dependents,

- disability(ies),

- religion,

- educational attainment

- sex ratio of current geographic area

- race ratio of current geographic area

etc

If it would be difficult for person X to develop another meaningful social bond (e.g., friendship), then given the importance of socioemotional resources on health outcomes & longevity, it would be in person X's best utilitarian interests to continue putting up with that person. (Note, this isn't being considered in the context of alcoholism, addiction, abuse, & other extremes in which obviously anyone should walk away from that individual).

Finally: The Turing Test (but for your human)

Would Replika or an interactive Ai chatbot provide sufficiently similar socioemotional resources than your friend?

If we code Ai as 0 (reference group) & current human fails to produce a significant difference from Ai, then current human is insufficient.

Recommendation is replace current human with Ai until next social world update or software upgrade.