X-Message-Number: 16379 Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 11:58:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Charles Platt <> Subject: Another can of worms To Michael Riskin: I have stated that I quit Alcor (a LONG time ago) largely because I believed patient funds were being misused at that time. You now suggest that I am covering up my real reasons. This is slightly offensive to me, and quite untrue. I don't have a copy of the Alcor bylaws from 1993, so I am forced to write from memory. But I do recall that the bylaws stated very specifically that patient funds were never to be invested in real estate. There were some other specific restrictions also. In 1993, Alcor was planning to use $100,000 of patient care funds to help purchase its new facility in Scottsdale. I felt that this would have violated the "no real estate investments" clause of the bylaws. I had other concerns, which I discussed with an Alcor official at that time. For instance, I felt that the funds should not be used to pay a portion of someone's wages. Most of all, I felt that the way in which patient funds were being used was quite different from the way in which most members _thought_ the money was being used. Since I was doing PR for Alcor, this put me in a very difficult position. I was asked, in effect, not to tell the members precisely what was going on. This marked the beginning of my decision to quit Alcor. At a meeting of the New York chapter of Alcor on August 15, 1993, I announced my decision to quit and cited my concern about patient funds as a primary reason. The minutes of that meeting mention that I felt the patient care fund policy "has been ignored many times." I had nowhere else to go at that time (or at least, no other organization to which I wanted to go). Therefore I was quitting Alcor and opting for no protection at all. This was a measure of my discontent. When the then-president of Alcor sent email asking me why I quit, I replied that some directors at Alcor, at that time, "feel entitled to do whatever they like--even if it entails violating guidelines re the patient care fund." (The two directors in question are no longer on the Alcor board.) I added that I would "lose nothing by cancelling my membership, because an organization which doesn't follow its own guidelines re the patient care fund--which is one of the most central concepts in the whole setup--isn't going to be around long enough to take care of my frozen remains anyway." During 1993 there was an entirely separate issue. Many people were annoyed by the tendency of Alcor directors to re-elect themselves (which they were perfectly entitled to do). After most of the directors re-elected themselves in the annual meeting in September, a bunch of Alcor members left and founded CryoCare. But, Michael, by that time, I had _already_ quit, for my own individual reasons. I think you are unaware of this, and you are assuming--wrongly-- that I was part of the mass exodus, sharing the same concerns as everyone else. In the past you have complained that I have posted here without "checking the facts." I believe you have committed the same small sin in this case. Subsequently, Steve Bridge spent literally years establishing a different method for patient care funds management at Alcor, which still exists, so far as I know. If there was nothing wrong with the system previously, I can only wonder why Steve spent such a huge amount of time instituting a different system. I respect your expertise as an accountant, and if you say that there was no malfeasance, I believe you are correct. In my naive idealism, I may have objected to plans or actions that were controversial, but technically legitimate. However, I am adamant that in 1992/93, there was an attitude of expediency among some directors toward the use of patient funds. I was not the only person who was troubled by this at the time. You are certainly not correct that I have attempted to rewrite history to conceal my primary motives for leaving the organization. --CP Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16379