X-Message-Number: 5816
From:  (Brian Wowk)
Newsgroups: uk.legal,sci.cryonics,sci.life-extension
Subject: Re: Death (was Donaldson MR and Miss Hindley)
Date: 24 Feb 96 06:38:44 GMT
Message-ID: <>

References: <> <4gcodb$>


In <4gcodb$>  (Graham Wilson) 
writes:

>In one case, someone set up a cryonics facility but was subsequently
>unable to afford to keep all the "patients" frozen. When the police
>raided the storage facility they found that the remains had thawed.

	This happened 20 years ago, and was essentially a one-man
operation in which relatives had pledged to provide maintenance
payments on an ongoing basis.  The payments stopped, the liquid
nitrogen shipments stopped, and the rest is an ugly piece of
cryonics history.

	The "big four" cryonics organizations in the U.S. today
now have some two orders of magnitude more people and resources
behind them than the man above did.  Also, cryonics patients are
NEVER accepted today based on promises of maintenance payments
from relatives.  All funds required for long-term care must
be received at the time cryopreservation begins (typically via
life insurance).  It's ironic that this new level of *prudence*,
not greed, creates the large cash flows that lead people to
call us "con men."  

>The problem - assuming your relatives are understanding- is how to
>protect the interests of the cryonic "patient". For example, suppose I
>am 45 and have an 18 year old son. At the time of contracting with the
>cryonics company I could make him privvy to the contract by getting
>him to sign. Within 50 - 60 years he will also be dead and under
>English law (presumably the same would be true elsewhere) the rules
>relating to privity of contract would prevent any future or other
>relative from enforcing the contract to protect my interests as the
>suspended "patient".

	At CryoCare, we have developed a unique approach to this
problem.  Members are permitted to appoint a person or organization
called a "Patient Advocate" to oversee their care within our
organization after they are cryopreserved.  Patient Advocates have
special powers, such as the right to vote for CryoCare board members,
and the right to request transfers of patients between our storage
sites (currently two). 
 
>The other major problem in English law is that there is no property in
>a dead body. It's the one thing that cannot be "owned" in English law.
>How do you protect an interest in property that has no title ? It is
>very difficult, if not impossible under current English law.

	Do not your medical schools use cadavers for training?  If
so, the people pledging their bodies for such purposes would have
had to have signed an Authorization for Anatomical Donation (or
some analogous document) giving custody of their remains to the
medical school for a period of time.  All states in the U.S., and
all provinces in Canada, have laws that enable anatomical
donations.  This is the legal mechanism by which cryonics societies
gain possesion of remains on this side of the Atlantic.  Surely
similar laws exist in England as well.   

>The cryonics industry is unaccountable. Most of the people working in
>the industry are genuine and have the interests of cryonics at heart.
>However, once they have your 100,000 - 200,000 pounds who is there to
>make sure the cryonics company represents your best interests ?  What
>if the cryonics company becomes insolvent ? Who is to say whether any
>medical procedure carried out upon a cryonic patient is in their
>interests ?

	I agree with everything here.  There are currently no accepted
standards in this field, and essentially anyone can (and sometimes
have) put up a sign calling themself a cryonics facility, creating
all sorts of mischief.  I believe the ultimate solution to this
problem will be the achievement of reversible suspended animation
of the brain.  This will, for the first time, provide an objective
end point by which to measure the efficacy of cryonics procedures.
Right now there a vast diversity in the procedures used to cryopreserve
cryonics patients, and no definitive way of evaluating whether any of them
will ultimately work.      

>The industry is very much against intervention and regulation.
>However, those who place these sums of money into cryonics deserve and
>require protection. The only way protection can be put in place is
>through a government authority regulating the industry and ultimately
>looking after the interests of cryonic patients.

	Like many cryonicists, I am a political libertarian, and would
thus prefer to see this industry self-regulate (via professional
oversight organizations, accreditation standards, etc.)  As the
industry grows, and objective endpoints (such as reversible brain
cryopreservation) are achieved, I think *some* form of regulation
is inevitable.  I am, however, very distrustful of governments
since all they have done so far for cryonics is give us very 
expensive legal bills.   

***************************************************************************
Brian Wowk          CryoCare Foundation               1-800-TOP-CARE
President           Your Gateway to the Future        
   http://www.cryocare.org/cryocare/

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5816