X-Message-Number: 7044
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:45:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: Dave Pizer's questions re Timothy Leary

I want to say a sincere thank you to Dave Pizer for his kind words and 
thoughtful questions about my article describing our efforts to freeze 
Timothy Leary.

> There is one correction I would like to add to this story.  This is where 
> Charles says "Like Alcor before us, we were willing to freeze Leary at a 
> significant discount because he was the most famous person who had ever 
> signed publicly with a cryonics organization."

I guess it all depends on how we define "discount." I realize that Alcor's
arrangement worked on the basis of donors offering to make up the
shortfall in Leary's funding. CryoCare ended up with a similar
arrangement. I guess this isn't literally a discount, and I should have
phrased it differently. But I meant to suggest that Alcor, like CryoCare,
took the Leary case despite inadequate life insurance; this I think is
true. Also, two days before Leary renounced cryonics, when I was 
discussing the option of surrendering the case to Alcor, I was told that 
Alcor would take it even if the insurance could not be reassigned. 

> Another minor correction is that Charles says that charges were dropped in 
> the Dora Kent matter "..but only after a hideously expensive legal 
> battle."

I realize that Alcor came out of this battle in good shape. I didn't mean 
to imply that Alcor had been damaged by the struggle. My point was that 
a) such legal battles can and do occur in cryonics, and b) they can cost 
a lot of money. This knowledge was a factor making me cautious as I 
contemplated possible repercussions if Leary chose suicide.

> The situation 
> Charles describes seems so terrible that the question comes up as to why 
> they did not call the authorities and have those bums thrown out or have 
> Mr. Leary transferred to a place where he would have received better 
> medical treatment. I'd like to know more about this.  

Well, of course we discussed this sort of option, but first, it was very
clear to us that Timothy Leary LIKED where he was and LIKED the way he was
being cared for (lots of acolytes around him, friends dropping in, a big
tank of nitrous oxide beside his bed, and so on). Did we have any right to
take him away "for his own good"? I don't think so. He knew what he 
wanted, and that's what he was getting.

Second, if we had reported substandard care to the authorities, we would
have embarrassed the primary care physician, permanently ending any hope
of a good working relationship. It seemed likely that Timothy Leary would
have been moved to a hospital or nursing home, where we might have been
allowed no access at all. Our best option for maintaining access and
trying to get good medical care seemed to be to establish a good
relationship with at least some people at the house, which was how I
became on friendly terms with Vicki Marshall, who helped us a lot. This
was also the reason why we asked Arel Lucas to act as intermediary for us. 

--Charles Platt
CryoCare


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7044