X-Message-Number: 5799 From: (Graham Wilson) Newsgroups: uk.legal,sci.cryonics,sci.life-extension Subject: Re: Death (was Donaldson MR and Miss Hindley) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 19:43:26 GMT Message-ID: <4gih3k$> References: <4gcodb$> <> John de Rivaz <> wrote: >The coroner is an individual, although he acts for the government. If >enough coroners can be educated that there is a slight chance of cryonics >revivals, I trust that their consciences would make them desist from >murdering the patient. I wouldn't use the term "murder". They are dead in the eyes of medicine and the law. The Coroner should not simply take the view that 'x' has chosen for cryonic suspension and therefore their right to enter or remain in suspension is gospel. The Coroner should weigh up the rights of the individual and the rights of society. If, for example, removing a body from cryonic suspension was the only way to obtain evidence that the suspendee was murdered then I think that the Coroner would be right to take that decision. > Also, I beleive that I am right in saying that >pathologists are doctors and have therefore taken the hypocratic oath. This >again has some bearing I think. I think that the process differs between English and American law. In England the pathologist carries out the medical examination of the body. The Coroner is normally a Solicitor or Barrister - Some are legally trained Doctors. The Coroner, on the advice of the Coroner's Officer (a police officer appointed for each district to investigate unusual deaths) takes the decision whether to order a post-mortem in the first place. Primarily, the decision is an evidential decision made on the evidence before the Coroner's officer. It would be very unusual for a Coroner to reject the advice of the officer and refuse to hold a post-mortem when so requested. > Another point to be made is that I am >pretty sure there is a legal principle that no individual working for a >government can act without any personal responsibility for what he is >doing. That is correct. The Coroner is subject to Judicial review. As it stands relatives can seek review in order to force a Coroner to hold a post-mortem should he/she refuse. However, as far as I am aware there has never been a successful case where relatives have prevented a Coroner from holding a post-mortem. >It may be worthwile for cryonics organisations to have special statements >drawn up to be given to cornoners and pathologists under these >circumstances. In limited circumstances they might be effective. For example, where a hospital decides to carry out a post-mortem in order to determine the cause of death where the matter has not been referred to the Coroner because the hospital believes the death to be natural. The problem is that until a body is claimed it is under the control of the hospital who may undertake a post-mortem or use it for the purposes of organ donation. Obviously, in most cases the hospital know who the relatives are and I am unaware of a case where a hospital has either carried out a post-mortem or used organs for transplanation, knowing who the relatives are, but proceeding simply because the relatives have not "claimed" the body. However, where someone is admitted to hospital and it is not clear who the relatives are then the hospital managers may take the decision to use the body for transplantation purposes. Similarly, they would be in a position to carry out a post-mortem examination. However, I think that it would be wrong to significantly interfere with the powers of the Coroner to investigate deaths of an unusual nature. The current test as to whether a Coroner orders a post-mortem examination is whether it is "likely" that the person died from unusual or unnatural causes. Perhaps in the case of a person who has opted for cryonic suspension it should be "on a balance of probabilities" that the person died in an unnatural manner before an examination is ordered ? Graham -- "Don't be afraid, say what you want to say, always be a free spirit. Don't be denied, hold your head up high, always be a free spirit." - Appleby.K Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5799