[ExI] Cryonics is getting weird

[BillK]

On 5/17/10, spike wrote:
>  Ja!  There are many human motives that cause us to do all the weird stuff
>  that we do.  Most of us here have family or friends who firmly believe that
>  we sinners have only one shot at eternity: to confess our sins and hope the
>  flying spaghetti monster forgives us, or some random deity will do likewise,
>  and that this all requires faith and a proper burial, etc.  Regardless of
>  our wishes, these family or friends might have far too much legal authority
>  over what happens to our rapidly cooling remains.
>
>  In all the motives that we humans carry, religious faith, sense of duty,
>  conscience, family obligations, greed, etc, I wish to put all my chips on
>  greed.  Self interest is the motive that to me is the easiest to understand,
>  the most reliable and trustworthy of human motives, even if often disparaged
>  as the basest.  If a team of memetically widely disparate individuals must
>  work together, greed is the motive I want in the driver's seat.
>
>

In some cases an autopsy is required by law. e.g. sudden or suspicious death.

The relatives can insist on an autopsy. e.g. if they want to sue
somebody for medical malpractice or are suspicious about medications
given near the time of death.
(The rewards from a successful suit can be in the millions).


Of course we can all see that Alcor's intent was to obtain legal
confirmation of the enforceability of contracts.

But it looks to me like winning a battle and losing the war.
What credibility does the cryonics process have when they are digging
up a year-old skull and freezing it?
To the general public it appears that Alcor want the money regardless
of the service they provide. (Inferring that their service is useless
anyway).

If they want to be considered as reputable science then what they
should have said was that they were unable to fulfill the contract due
to deliberate obstructionism from the relatives and refused to return
the money to the relatives. This would have left it up to the
relatives to sue for the return of the money. But the relatives would
have lost on the same grounds as Alcor won the right exhume the body.
Quote: The Iowa Court of Appeals reversed the decision Wednesday. It
said the lower court should have granted Alcor’s request because the
siblings ignored their brother’s request.

This would have been much better PR. Making the siblings out to be the
money-grabbing evil-doers who ignored their brother's dying wishes so
as to snatch the money back from Alcor.

BillK