X-Message-Number: 10834
From: 
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 11:34:47 EST
Subject: reanimation funds

John de Rivaz (#10830) has given his thoughtful analysis of some of the
options for reanimation trusts. However, perhaps I should again mention
another  route.

What Mae and I plan to do, as others in CI have done or plan to do, is leave
the bulk of our estate to CI. This will not be a "trust" and will not be
earmarked for our personal separate benefit, but nevertheless will have
several advantages over setting up either a personal trust or a pooled
"reanimation" trust.

First, there is simplicity; we avoid all the costs and mechanics of setting up
a trust and finding suitable trustees and successor trustees. 

Second, we gain flexibility of utilization. The overall aim, after all, is to
maximize the patients' chances in the face of ALL challenges. If some
emergency arises while the patient is still in storage, that must be dealt
with. If a "reanimation" trust has assets that are available only at time of
reanimation  technology, that will be useless if the patient is already lost
because of some earlier crisis. If the reanimation trust is written to allow
the trustees to use the assets for such contingencies, then we have possible
disagreements between the cryonics organization and the reanimation trust
trustees as to appropriate application of assets, as well as duplication of
expenses. 

Third, the organization is strengthened, which might easily turn out to be the
main factor in the success of the patient's storage and reanimation. (This
might be considered another aspect of the "flexibility" mentioned above.) 

Putting "all your eggs in one basket" obviously has both advantages and
potential disadvantages, with historical examples on both sides. But when you
have chosen a cryonics organization, you have already entrusted that
organization with your person and with at least some of your money. Choosing
another vehicle for the rest of your money suggests that your main choice was
doubtful. 

A variation, which some have already chosen, is to give one cryonics
organization primary responsibility, with another organization given funding
for availability as backup, in case the first organization should fail or need
assistance. (If things go smoothly, the backup organization will help with the
costs of reanimation.)

Finally, a reminder that CI already has available a form of revocable living
trust. This is not a reanimation trust, but a way of using various kinds of
assets to fund a suspension; at the patient's death, CI receives the assets.
Until the member dies, he retains full control and can change his mind at any
time.

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society
http://www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10834