[ExI] FW: [tt] [New_Cryonet] Should Cryonics, Cryothanasia, and Transhumanism Be Part of the Euthanasia Debate?

[BillK]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:20 PM, spike wrote:
> Jeff Davis posted this commentary to the TT list.  I don't think he
> would mind if I post it here.  It's a topic I have been thinking about a lot:
> if one is getting Alzheimers or other related progressive dementia,
> as far as I know there are no proactive measures to go into cryonic
> suspension while you still have something in there worth freezing.
>  If you end up in a memory care facility, the quality of life in there
> for one's remaining time in this mortal coil isn't worth a warm bucket
> of spit, and costs a fortune.  Go see it for yourself por favor.  I think
> we should have the option, when faced with that dreadful fate, to
> just go ahead and take the nitrogen bath.
> If you disagree, do state your case.
>


Several thoughts -

>From an outsiders (and government) POV, cryonics does equal death, so
the same laws would apply to cryonics and to euthanasia. i.e. citizens
won't legally be allowed an early death by any method unless they are
in a state where euthanasia is allowed. (Though it does happen
unofficially).

If euthanasia is allowed, then I don't see any reason for the
authorities to object to a cryonics team standing by and taking over
after death is declared.

While a care home is expensive, so is cryonics at that late stage,
where it has to be paid in a lump sum. So as a precaution, healthy old
people might consider a life insurance policy.

Until recently, people only moved into a care home when they became
too ill to be cared for at home. This meant that, on average, they
only lived for a period of months or a few years, so the annual care
home fees did not usually mount up too high. Though dementia patients
who are otherwise healthy might live longer and care would therefore
cost more.


BillK