X-Message-Number: 10787
From: "Trygve B. Bauge" <>

Subject: What are the rights of grown children when in conflict with remaining 
parent over cryonic storage of the other parent?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 13:10:10 +0100

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable  

>> The 32 year old in Mandal did not prevail. Her uncle became violent >>
against her,   

>Is that not against the law in Norway as it is in most other places?   

Yes, and I did suggest to her that she contact a lawyer, so to find out
what rights she has. In particular it would have been of value to find out
what rights an adult  has when in a conflict with one surviving parent
over how to dispose of the other newely diseased parent.  

I even contacted a news paper that was willing to put her in touch with  a
legal scholar at the University here in Oslo.  

However, I don't know yet if she has done so.   

Maybe someone else here on cryonet knows what the laws are in other parts 
of the world?  

If the remaining spouse and one or more adult children, fight over whether
or not to freeze the diseased parent, or cell samples of the latter, who
then decides and how?  

I can see several approaches: If the dead parent left a will that was in
favour of or against cryonics then that would pretty much answer the

In lieu of a will, an expressed interest one way or the other might  hold
up, if the other parties don't try to fight this in court.  

If the diseased has not expressed itself one way or the other, it might be
that the remaining spouse is the one that has the power to decide.  

On the other hand the adult kid could make the argument that he or she was
closer to the dead parent, or that the remaining parent is unfit to make
the decission. (Of course the other part might make the same argument,
claiming that the one in favour of cryonics is unfit......)  

Either way, any child that is not disinherited by the dead parent, would
certainly have a right to inherit the latter, and an argument could be
made that one also has the right to at least half the body now, and the
rest of the body once the other parent passes away as well,  (which might
at least give one a chance to take and store some cell samples or even the

Sometimes some or all  inheritance is not paid out until the remaining
spouse dies as well, but letting the remaining spouse block even the
preservation of cell samples seems kind of harse.  

Certainly there must be lots of conflicts that other cryonisists have come
across over the years. How were these conflicts decided? Would anyone care
to enlighten me and the other readers?  

I know of my grand father's case. In that situation his wife had already
preceded him in death, and he had only one child: my mother. Once she
agreed to have him frozen, no other relative could stop it, my sister


Ps. If we ever write a law regarding cryonics, maybe the text could be
that in any conflict over how to dispose of a dead parent,  and in lack of
a clear will, the spouse or child that is most inclined to and suited to
cryonically preserve the dead parent for future revival will get to take
possession of the dead body?  

Of course one still have the conflict when several relatives battle over
what cryonic company to use. But then one could still revert to the older
rule that the nearest kind e.g. the spouse, gets priority, and when there
is no remaining spouse, then the oldest grown kid gets to make the
decission etc.  

Of couse a predeath contract with a cryonic company would cut through all
the above problems. However, we would still need a way to solve the above
problems too, as long as people keep postponing signing up their relatives
until the latter are unable to do so on their own.  

No doubt a lot of the post mortem sign up attempts and conflicts are due
to the relative that really wants cryonics, not being ready to or not
daring to take up or bring the topic to a decission at an earlier point.
However some deaths occure untimely and before one expected, and one might
not have gotten around to do the sign up, of someone who otherwise would
have agreed.  

Either way, I think we should be open for post mortem signups, and for
supporting the part that wants a cryonic suspension, in the latter's
battle with others that don't want such.  


Life-Extension Systems, Norwegian Icebathing Association & Action 88. For
a VHS video presentation of my work, send $50 to Trygve B.Bauge  c/o
Aksjon 88, P.o.b.59 Hovseter,0705 Oslo,Norway Ph 47-2214-8078 E-mail: 

Content-Type: text/html;

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10787