X-Message-Number: 32411
From: 
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:19:13 EST
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32404 - #32408

There must be many ways to prevent greedy relatives from trying to get  
suspension money by canceling suspensions. One's will might specify the exact  
amounts (not percentages) to each relative and suspension, with the rest 
going  to reanimation trusts or charities. Preferably, "the rest" would be a 
lot, so  there is a comfortable safety factor. Thus the relatives would not 
benefit form  canceling a suspension. Better yet is a clause deleting the 
inheritance of  anyone interfering.Or, as Rudy says, the insurance beneficiary 
may be  Alcor/SA/CI directly.
 
What I think is needed here is just some legal advice showing how to  
structure a will with standard clauses to remove the possibility of relatives  
profiting if a suspension is prevented.
 
Alan Mole
 
 
In a message dated 2/22/2010 3:00:33 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,  
 writes:

Mary  Robbins's relatives might have decided to interfere with her  
suspension
because they had heard the previous episodes of bad publicity  regarding
Alcor, including rumors of the abuse of a frozen head. If they  succeed in
preventing Robbins's suspension, while also intercepting the  money she had
set aside for it, that will give other members' relatives the  precedent and
incentive to try to stop their suspensions. And even if Alcor  wins custody
of Robbins's body, the media might frame the story in a way  sympathetic to
the relatives and derogatory to Alcor, contributing to  problems down the
line with other suspensions opposed by the suspendees'  family members.
What should we do to keep this from happening to  potentially all of us with
living  relatives?




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

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32411