X-Message-Number: 27885
From: 
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 00:52:16 EDT
Subject: Voluntary and timely deanimation an important topic

In a message dated 4/30/2006 5:00:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
 writes:

What I  think we should discuss is this idea in general, and specifically   
what things can be withdrawn (ventilators? drugs? transfusions? dialysis?)  
that  
are legal and will bring about death with reasonable  promptness. 

Alan Mole



This is Rudi Hoffman writing from Florida.
 
I agree with Alan that mechanisms of voluntary deanimation are and should  be 
an important topic on "cryonet."  
 
There are multiple challenges to the practice of voluntary deanimation  

currently, however.  In addition to the legal environment, cryonics  
organizations 
are very aware of the potential dangers of encouraging or even  APPEARING to 
allow suicide or euthanasia.
 
I have had numerous conversations with Cryonics execs who have been  

abundantly clear that the downside risk of a PR disaster is too significant  
regarding 
this issue.  No one wants our cryonics vendors and staff to be  accused of 
murder, or the integrity of our cryonics vendor called into question  by a 
populist media and granstanding demigogues.
 
This does not mean that we as a cryonics community can not try and figure  
out some reasonable and safe alternatives that may allow the common sense  

application of voluntary deanimation.  While protecting our cryonics  
organizations 
from any negative repercussions or fallout that the "pitchfork  mob" might 
pursue.
 
Many of you, I am sure, remember the Dora Kent days, when a county coroner  

insisted on an autopsy because Dora Kent had allegedly been given too much pain
 medication which may have hastened her death.  
 
We know Alcor and CI are very cautious, and should be, about these  matters.  
 
At one time, there was a movement by 3 long time cryonicists to set up a  

voluntary deanimation option facility based in Switzerland.  However, I  have 
not 
heard about anything on this front recently.  

Does anyone  know anything about this?

What alternatives would enable a terminal  individual to have an optimal 

suspension, without getting his/her cryonics  vendor in potential SERIOUS 
trouble? 
 
Cryonics is already controversial enough in its own right.  We  certainly 
don't need regulators and fundamentalists involved in the next  generation of 
"Terri Schiavo" government intrusion.  
 
Rather than simply being frustrated at the current state of what seems  to me 
to be a fairly straightforward personal choice issue, let's  stay focused on 
solutions and optimal outcomes in these postings.
 
While being aware that the net is a public venue in which any postings can  
be recalled with a 10 second search on Google.  

Respectfully  Submitted,
 
Rudi  

 

Rudi Richard Hoffman CFP  CLU

Board Member Financial Planning Association fpafla.org
Board  Member Salvation Army salvationarmy.org
Member Alcor Life Extension  Foundation alcor.org
Certified Financial Planner(TM) CFP Board of Standards  
Member Libertarian Party libertarianparty.org
Member National Rifle  Association nra.org
Member World Transhumanist Association  http://transhumanism.org/
World's Leading Cryonics Insurance Provider  rudihoffman.com


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27885