X-Message-Number: 16516 From: Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:34:25 EDT Subject: Swayze (missing?) post On 9 June I sent the message below, which should have appeared on Cryonet on 10 June. However, on 10 June, I and at least some others received no email from Cryonet, although the Cryonet web site shows a set of messages, including this one for 10 June. R.E. -------------- Subj: Swayze possibilities Date: 6/9/01 2:24:18 PM US Mountain Standard Time From: Ettinger To: James Swayze has been public about his predicament, so before broaching the following thoughts to the Cryonics Institute's Board of Directors, I am making them public for feedback from James or others, and correction of any mistakes I may have made. For late comers, Mr. Swayze some years ago broke his neck in an accident (possibly in part as a result of his own recklessness) and became a quadriplegic, although retaining some use of his arms. (He can use a computer.) There have been other medical complications, and he lives with appallingly severe impairments, pain, and danger. But he retains a fighting spirit, along with considerable intellectual and artistic assets. He cannot afford cryopreservation arrangements, but desperately wants this chance. Some old and new friends have pledged some donations toward this, but far short of what is needed. CI already has a policy-very rarely implemented so far-whereby a member can contribute services in lieu of cash toward his membership fee and suspension fee, when appropriate. But there has to be real service, a real quid pro quo. CI as an organization cannot engage in charity, cannot give away its members' assets. Any payments or credits for service must be genuine value-for-value, based on market conditions. Of course, value estimates can sometimes be rather rough. For example, Alcor in the past has been willing to "give" suspension fee credit on the basis of expected valuable publicity. Who knows how much benefit would really have accrued if Fred Pohl had accepted a "free" suspension? But it would have been a good-faith business judgment, as was the case with the magazine essay contest and the "free" suspension. But in Mr. Swayze's case there are special complications. His income and assets are minimal, and if he obtains any new income or assets, the state in which he resides will reduce his welfare payments by the same amount. Therefore-subject to correction by people more knowledgeable in the law-I suggest the following possibility. His compensation could be deferred, being realized only when CI actually suspends him. Hence he would not have to report his accumulating credit as income, and CI would not have to pay payroll taxes. Since he would be working at home, on his computer, and with PR people, and not on our premises, I don't think we would have to put him on the Workmen's Comp list. I don't think we would have to report the value of his services as income. After his death and suspension, CI might have to pay payroll taxes, and his estate would have to report the income. Several questions remain. What happens if his work becomes unsatisfactory, or he becomes too ill to work, or if he dies before accumulating full suspension credit? Some tentative ideas: CI should have the right, in our own good faith judgment, to terminate the arrangement at any time by paying in cash any accumulated credits and canceling any other obligations. Mr. Swayze could also terminate the arrangement at any time and request cash payment for past services. If he were to die or become unable to work, before accumulating enough credit for a standard suspension, then CI would provide a cheaper suspension-if necessary, something like chemical fixation or freeze drying, which are on our research agenda in any case. There could be a minimum work period required (five years?). As far as I can see at the moment, that covers most of the bases. Doubtless others will have further objections or constructive suggestions. Before stopping, let me reiterate some of the possibilities in this situation, some unusual features of Mr. Swayze's situation. First, most people find it difficult to understand that a "normal" or "good" life is almost nothing, compared to the potential of indefinitely extended life in an unlimited future. They find it much easier to understand the loss when a baby dies, or when a young and healthy man is tragically stricken. In Mr. Swayze's case we are talking about someone with exceptional potential at the time of the tragedy-an airplane pilot at an early age, tall, handsome, and gifted, the world his oyster and then cruelly snatched away. And now-drum roll-another chance! There are quite a few handicapped people, dealt a rotten hand the first time around. Unfortunately, most of them are poor, but not all. Two signed-up cryonicists are blind men with Ph.D.s. And what about dying babies? We could probably offer a somewhat lower price for infants. Don't bury their chances! Eventually it may sink in that even "old" people dying "natural" deaths are missing almost everything. But someone like James Swayze can provide the drama and the personal detail to make a difference in public relations. And even if we only save his life, that's important too, if only for our own morale. Esprit de corps and all that. Robert Ettinger Cryonics Institute Immortalist Society http://www.cryonics.org Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16516