X-Message-Number: 3763 Date: 27 Jan 95 16:04:18 EST From: Michael Riskin <> Subject: Reply to Mike Darwin In his post # 3758, Mr. Darwin writes: " Whether the patients are going to be resuscitated is irrelevant. Case histories containing personal details of peoples lives and most private thoughts are published all the time while the patient is still alive". and continues on to say later... " Riskin in particular should know that the psychiatric literature is rich in this tradition. Whole books have been written discussing interpretations of cases first discussed by Freud, Jung, and everybody else". Mr. Darwin is using an argument from common practice in the medical community. I take exception on two grounds. First, the fact that something is common practice in the medical community does not make it alright. I am sure that Mr. Darwin can enumerate several such instances, far better than I. Second, while many case histories are published of real cases (not composite or fake), the professional standard (assuming a release is not granted) I prefer, is to alter non critical, non identifying information as to maintain anonimity, and this is in fact done in the "medical journals" he references. As compared to the general population of medical cases, our community of patients is very small, and easily identifiable....and I believe requires an extra measure of confidentiality precautions. If we consider our patients "truly patients", with the potential of a conscious life, (as compared to permanently dead people we keep frozen), the factor of the possible impact on their future life of personal disclosures, should be considered. Perhaps Mr. Darwin would consider taking this into account, on his own, (prior to possible communication with the Alcor CEO), instead of stating: " In the meantime, I will proceed exactly have I have". Finally, Mr. Darwin made a speculative interpretation of this discussion by stating: "However, if the notion is that I cannot discuss well over 10 years of my career.........." , and concluded with a statement (I paraphrase) that perhaps the courts will need to decide the issue. Well... I simply do not know how Mr. Darwin arrived at that from any of my previous remarks. His leap into a possible legal action requiring court decisions, (based on this ongoing discussion of confidentiality within the cryonics community), seems to be quite a "stretch", if not provocative. Michael Riskin Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3763