X-Message-Number: 27207 From: "marta sandberg" <> Subject: Regulating cryonics Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 11:03:28 +0800 I agree with Jordan Sparks' posting on regulating cryonics. There are no laws about cryonics and so far our cryonics organizations have had to try to apply whatever we have to our situation. Some areas have been covered CI recently received licensing from the local health board (?? or something like that) and Alcor has, in principle, established their right to operate through a series of court cases. I don't think anyone would consider that a satisfactory result. The problem is that the future might be even worse. Sooner or later cryonics will be regulated by comprehensive laws and regulations. But politicians do not like to act and they will probably only do so when there is enough pressure on them. Now ask yourself a nasty question. Where is that pressure likely to come from? Unfortunately, the most likely answer a group hostile to cryonics that will lobby politicians until they act. As the pro-cryonics lobby group is vanishing small, there will be no effective oppositions. Alternative, there will be some publicised disaster (see Chatsworth) and the politicians will react with punitive legislation to pacify the public outcry and to prove that it wasn't their fault that they hadn't acted yet. Neither of these are comforting thoughts. That is why we have to act now. Either we come up with an industry code or the politicians eventually will. There are many bodies that are self-regulating and they have largely escaped statutory force as long as their own rules work. Such laws that have been passed are based on their own internal regulations and therefore suit the organizations. Lawyers, accountants, doctors, builders and tradesmen spring to mind (at least in Australia). It is possible for cryonics to set up something similar by forming an overarching self-regulating agency that sets standards, issue licences, inspect and police those standards and give the public the reassurance that the industry is regulated. There must be sufficient leeway in the standards that all legitimate groups can comply. If I have a small quibble with Jordan Sparks it would be the assumption that there should be a specially trained response team. That is based on Alcor's model whilst CI has taken a different, but equally professional, approach. On the other hand, it is quite possible that existing organizations will have to alter their current practices in some way in order to live up to the expected standards of good corporate governance, fiduciary duty and fiscal responsibility. In fact, that should be seen as a positive outcome of the proposed system. Having an outside body audit your organization and making recommendations of where you can tighten up your methods is a good thing, as long as the outsider is sympathetic to your aims. Personally, I would like to see much tighter rules in dealing with the very considerable amounts of money that our cryonic organizations have collected. We are getting a tempting target for unscrupulous raiders and conmen. Unless the present systems are overhauled I fear for the long-term safety of patient funding. Jordan Sparks managed to identify the biggest hurdle time. Who will do all the hard work? I was encouraged at recent meeting between CI and Alcor. The first step is cooperation. The second step it that the head of all existing cryonic organizations decides something should be done and agreeing to an outline in principle. Then comes Step Three and that is a dozy. Set up the overarching group. Give it a constitution. Formulated the regulations. However, we can start with step One and Two and it is even possible to give it some urgency. Step Three mightn't be such a problem. For example, it is possible to crib from existing self-regulating organizations and it may even be possible to interest a university or similar to take up the scheme as a group study project. We should at lest try. We need to regulate cryonics before a disaster similar to Chatsworth sneaks up on us again and before we are regulated by (hostile) politicians. Marta Sandberg _________________________________________________________________ MyCareer.com.au: Visit the NEW Salary Survey http://www.mycareer.com.au/salary-survey/?s_cid=203697 Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27207