CryoNet #32418 - #32419

CryoNet - Thu 25 Feb 2010

    #32418: Anonymity on Cryonics Plans - Disaster Hazard [Kitty Antonik Wakfer]
    #32419: Do we want to be a Movement? [hrhirsch]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32418%2D32419

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe
To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
from the same address to which you are aubscribed.

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32418
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:15:01 -0700
From: Kitty Antonik Wakfer <[email protected]>
Subject: Anonymity on Cryonics Plans - Disaster Hazard

--------------060400080108090506030504

I have read with interest the recent number of postings regarding 
challenges to cryonics suspension contracts by relatives, the latest 
legal battle apparently regarding a Mary Robbins.

I think it highly unlikely that any of the individuals posting to 
CryoNet using their own names, who have contracts with Alcor or CI (the 
only current providers) will be in a situation like Mary Robbins. 
Keeping one's contract with a cryonics provider entirely secret or known 
only to a very small number is more likely to lead to non-cryonics 
supportive relatives challenging those plans than if the cyronicist had 
been strongly public about his/her (hir) plans. Being anonymous about 
cryonics is *not* protection for a signed-up cryonicist but rather an 
opportunity for relatives who do not agree to wreak havoc with those plans.

Relatives who voice disagreement with a cryonicist's plans after 
cryonics has been well explained to them are *not* true friend material 
and should not be treated as such. Being biologically related, even 
closely such as parent-child or siblings, in no way assures that two 
people will have the same value structure as do true friends, and such 
people should be seen as simply associates/acquaintances. For a 
cryonicist to keep as a close friend/confidante, someone who clearly 
opposes cryonics is to give a possible later court reason to question 
how serious was the person's desire for the cryonics procedure. And for 
any cryonicist to give such a person hir Power of Attorney for Health 
Care (or whatever it is called these days in a particular locale) is a 
recipe for disaster. Yes, the person(s) is still biologically related, 
but if the cryonicist makes it publicly clear that anti-cryonicist 
relatives are *not* friends - and also has friends who definitely are 
pro-cryonics - then I think it highly unlikely that any lawyer (or 
court, if it were to get that far) is going to support the relative's 
case for preventing (timely) cryonic preservation. If there is a sizable 
estate, asset provisions for relatives *only* upon timely cryonic 
suspension taking place also makes good sense - incentive to see that it 
does occur.

Comments on this subject from Paul Wakfer (which he will send separately 
to the Alcor Board of Directors):

1. Alcor needs to have a clear written criteria for the minimum 
biological state of remains that they will take legal measures in order 
to cryopreserve. Such criteria need to be scientifically and medically 
reasonable with respect to current standards of reasonableness about the 
potentially viable state of the member.

2. The above does not relate to the wishes of any member for the state 
of his/her remains with respect to which cryopreservation should still 
proceed, but only to those situations where legal measures are necessary.

3. The member cryopreservation contract should clearly state that if the 
member is not fully and publicly open about his/her cryonicist plans and 
maintains close relationships with relatives who are not cryonicists 
(even if they are not vocally against it), then it is possible that such 
relatives will take custody of the body and delay the cryopreservation 
so that the criteria noted in 1. are not met, in which case Alcor will 
*not* attempt to have the member cryopreserved and will return any 
insurance or prepaid moneys to the Estate.

4. This constant charge that the cryopreservation provider (Alcor) is 
"after the money" would be totally unsustainable if the "Patient 
Advocate" arrangement originated by CryoCare were adopted and promoted. 
In that situation the Patient Advocate would be taking the legal 
measures to get custody of the body so that the cryopreservation 
provider could cryopreserve it. The Patient Advocate would receive no 
payment beyond the expenses necessary to accomplish this purpose (under 
a payment arrangement that is part of the initial contract between the 
Patient Advocate and the cryonicist for whom it is the Advocate.

-- 
**Kitty Antonik Wakfer

MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org
Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality
The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org
Self-sovereignty, rational pursuit of optimal lifetime happiness,
individual responsibility, social preferencing & social contracting


--------------060400080108090506030504

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32418

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32419
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:53:00 -0500
From: hrhirsch <[email protected]>
Subject: Do we want to be a Movement?

The word "movement" suggests a cult to me. I think of cryonics as a 
field of study with practical applications in the same way that I 
think of physics. Wouldn't we project a better image if we called 
ourselves the cryonics community, defined as a group of people 
interested in the study and practice of cryonics?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32419

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************