X-Message-Number: 4515
Date:  Thu, 15 Jun 95 13:55:06 
From: Steve Bridge <>
Subject: Assisted Suicide Laws

To CryoNet
>From Steve Bridge, Alcor
June 15, 1995

     There are several interesting subjects on CryoNet right now.  I'd 
love to be part of the debate; but we just did a suspension (details in a 
day or two), and I am up to my ears in other projects which have to be 
completed in the next two weeks.  Still, I need to jump in on one debate.

     There has been some nervousness expressed that tying cryonics with 
euthanasia could be destructive to cryonics.  Frankly, this is not our 
experience; but some qualifications are required, especially as to 
language.  In the United States we rarely use the phrase "voluntary 
euthanasia."  In fact, "euthanasia" has taken on a strong negative 
connotation of *involuntary death* -- the phrase "mercy killing" is 
commonly used as a synonym.  So in the United States the term "assisted 
suicide" is most common for those circumstances where a terminally ill 
person chooses -- on his own volition -- to terminate his life. 

     Alcor has some unusual experience with this because of the Thomas 
Donaldson case in 1990.  Thomas (a frequent contributor to this list) has 
a brain tumor, currently in remission.  But someday this tumor may begin 
to grow again; and, if it cannot be halted quickly, will essentially 
destroy Thomas's memory and identity long before it induces "legal death."  

     When Thomas discovered this in late 1989, he decided --in concert 
with Alcor-- to seek judicial permission to go into cryonic suspension 
before legal death, as quickly as possible should the tumor started to 
grow again.  Since one cannot place oneself into suspension, such a 
procedure would come under the heading of "assisted suicide."

     It is legal to attempt suicide in all 50 states of the U.S.  In 1990 
it was illegal to *assist* someone to commit suicide in all 50 states (as 
far as we knew then; Kevorkian had not yet raised our awareness of the 
fuzziness in Michigan law).  Thomas could simply have done something to 
end his own life, of course.  The REAL problem was that a suicide would 
have become a coroner's case; and (especially that soon after the highly 
publicized Dora Kent investigation) an autopsy and many legal delays in 
suspension were extremely likely.  So Thomas also sought an injunction 
against an autopsy.  (Please pardon the necessary simplification in order 
to move on to the basic points of this discussion.) 

     The California Superior Court and Court of Appeals refused Thomas's 
request, on the grounds that they could not overturn the assisted suicide 
act and that such relief would have to come from the legislature.  
Fortunately for Thomas (and for all of us friends), he is still doing 
pretty well.  But the key point here is the reaction of people at the 
time.

     Alcor did an immense amount of publicity concerning the Donaldson 
Case, including a number of major print articles, dozens of radio 
interviews, and an appearance on the Phil Donahue Show.  Even though some 
of the listeners were not convinced that cryonics would *work*, the amount 
of empathy for Thomas's situation was incredible.  For the first time, 
many individuals were able to see themselves in a situation where they 
themselves might choose suicide and might even choose cryonics.

     And just about everyone seemed to *understand* the choice.  Thomas 
was faced with death -- possibly what most people would label as an 
"horrible" death.  He wanted to have control of his situation.  People did 
NOT see cryonics as a type of suicide or death wish.  From my experience 
at that time and since, it is very clear to most people that cryonics was 
not an attempt at suicide.  They understand very well that we may be 
forced to *use the laws* dealing with suicide to accomplish our aims.  
Americans are very much aware that one tries to use the law in your favor 
even if that was not the original intent of the statute in question.  We 
are a country of laws, for good or for ill.

     In short, I do *not* believe that cryonics will gain a bad image if 
we use the various new laws which permit assisted suicide in terminal 
cases.  These people are dying and have no other choice.  Allowing pre-
mortem cryonic suspension of terminal patients will ENHANCE the image of 
cryonics to a degree that we might all have trouble imagining, as long as 
we handle the decisions in an ethical and professional way.   And, of 
course, if we continue to EXPLAIN the differences between cryonics and 
true suicide.  

     Certainly, if we encourage people to go into suspension because they 
are depressed or mildly ill or somewhat inconvenienced, then we will have 
image difficulties.  But as long as we restrict premortem suspension to 
people in definitely terminal conditions, most people will see us as 
attempting to preserve life.

     Contrary to some opinions, I think it is possible that eventually the 
Catholic Church will view cryonics as a permissible medical technology.  
Several priests have already told us that they see no religious conflicts.  
attempt to avoid suicide.  I also speculate that the Catholic Church may 
even view *pre-mortem* cryonic suspension as something other than suicide.  
The intent is completely different.  Suicide is wilfully choosing death 
when other options exist.  Cryonics is willfully choosing life when the 
only option left is death.

     In any case, I am delighted to see Australia's Northern Territory 
passing a law allowing assisted suicide.  Yes, if it is practical, Alcor 
would be happy to use that law for our benefit, as well as any other 
similar laws passed in the United States.  I cannot at the moment 
speculate on the different technical approaches that might be used.  
Others will have a better idea than I of the possibilities.  However, the 
legal and social aspects are in my territory, and I firmly believe these 
favor us using whatever laws may be best for our patients.  That kind of 
caring attitude and respect for life -- even if we have to use the 
appearance of death to save lives -- will gain respect for cryonics.


Steve Bridge


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4515