[ExI] Cryonics

[Keith Henson]

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:16 PM,  Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:

snip
>
> Sadly, it appears Mr. Richardson blew it.  Anyone hoping to get a good
> suspension needs to learn from his tragic lapse of judgment.

That's true, but it there is also a defect in the Alcor contract that
encourages this kind of behavior on the part of families.

I wrote about this on the Cryonet mailing list in Feb:

*********

Some of the recent problem with suspensions may be coming from
relatives having a financial incentive to block suspensions.

If we think about it, most of us have a relative hostile to cryonics
who could be in a place to block a suspension depending on who died
first.

I think the section of the contract that specifies where the
suspension funding goes needs to be modified.  In fact I am going to
do this myself soon as I can get it worded correctly

Delete the section about who gets the funding if an Alcor member is
not suspended with this.
***********
In the event a suspension cannot be performed, (lost at sea, WTC
collapse, etc.) Alcor is still the beneficiary of the suspension
funding.  In such cases, Alcor may at its sole discretion pay part or
all of the suspension funding to a person or persons named here or to
the estate of the member.

(name of person, persons)

Alcor is forbidden to pay any part of the suspension funding to a
person or persons who have interfered with the member's prompt
suspension.

************

Keith
.