X-Message-Number: 32418 Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:15:01 -0700 From: Kitty Antonik Wakfer <> Subject: Anonymity on Cryonics Plans - Disaster Hazard --------------060400080108090506030504 I have read with interest the recent number of postings regarding challenges to cryonics suspension contracts by relatives, the latest legal battle apparently regarding a Mary Robbins. I think it highly unlikely that any of the individuals posting to CryoNet using their own names, who have contracts with Alcor or CI (the only current providers) will be in a situation like Mary Robbins. Keeping one's contract with a cryonics provider entirely secret or known only to a very small number is more likely to lead to non-cryonics supportive relatives challenging those plans than if the cyronicist had been strongly public about his/her (hir) plans. Being anonymous about cryonics is *not* protection for a signed-up cryonicist but rather an opportunity for relatives who do not agree to wreak havoc with those plans. Relatives who voice disagreement with a cryonicist's plans after cryonics has been well explained to them are *not* true friend material and should not be treated as such. Being biologically related, even closely such as parent-child or siblings, in no way assures that two people will have the same value structure as do true friends, and such people should be seen as simply associates/acquaintances. For a cryonicist to keep as a close friend/confidante, someone who clearly opposes cryonics is to give a possible later court reason to question how serious was the person's desire for the cryonics procedure. And for any cryonicist to give such a person hir Power of Attorney for Health Care (or whatever it is called these days in a particular locale) is a recipe for disaster. Yes, the person(s) is still biologically related, but if the cryonicist makes it publicly clear that anti-cryonicist relatives are *not* friends - and also has friends who definitely are pro-cryonics - then I think it highly unlikely that any lawyer (or court, if it were to get that far) is going to support the relative's case for preventing (timely) cryonic preservation. If there is a sizable estate, asset provisions for relatives *only* upon timely cryonic suspension taking place also makes good sense - incentive to see that it does occur. Comments on this subject from Paul Wakfer (which he will send separately to the Alcor Board of Directors): 1. Alcor needs to have a clear written criteria for the minimum biological state of remains that they will take legal measures in order to cryopreserve. Such criteria need to be scientifically and medically reasonable with respect to current standards of reasonableness about the potentially viable state of the member. 2. The above does not relate to the wishes of any member for the state of his/her remains with respect to which cryopreservation should still proceed, but only to those situations where legal measures are necessary. 3. The member cryopreservation contract should clearly state that if the member is not fully and publicly open about his/her cryonicist plans and maintains close relationships with relatives who are not cryonicists (even if they are not vocally against it), then it is possible that such relatives will take custody of the body and delay the cryopreservation so that the criteria noted in 1. are not met, in which case Alcor will *not* attempt to have the member cryopreserved and will return any insurance or prepaid moneys to the Estate. 4. This constant charge that the cryopreservation provider (Alcor) is "after the money" would be totally unsustainable if the "Patient Advocate" arrangement originated by CryoCare were adopted and promoted. In that situation the Patient Advocate would be taking the legal measures to get custody of the body so that the cryopreservation provider could cryopreserve it. The Patient Advocate would receive no payment beyond the expenses necessary to accomplish this purpose (under a payment arrangement that is part of the initial contract between the Patient Advocate and the cryonicist for whom it is the Advocate. -- **Kitty Antonik Wakfer MoreLife for the rational - http://morelife.org Reality based tools for more life in quantity and quality The Self-Sovereign Individual Project - http://selfsip.org Self-sovereignty, rational pursuit of optimal lifetime happiness, individual responsibility, social preferencing & social contracting --------------060400080108090506030504 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32418