X-Message-Number: 5480
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 19:39:58
From: Steve Bridge <>
Subject: Alcor non-suspension questions
To CryoNet
>From Steve Bridge, Alcor
December 26, 1995
In response to: Message #5466
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 18:52:34 -0800
From: (American Cryonics Society)
(Jim Yount)
Subject: Rob Michels Tragedy
And: Message #5470
From:
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 13:39:22 -0500
Subject: non-suspensions & misc.
Thanks first to Bob Ettinger for his very complete answer to Jim
Yount on how CI handles these problems. That will save me a lot of
writing, since Alcor pretty much does the same, and for the same reasons.
Most of the time, it is not appropriate to discuss the private wishes
of Alcor's members or patients publicly, including where funding is
concerned. If it ever does become appropriate to discuss those wishes on
CryoNet or in the pages of Cryonics Magazine, I will do so at that time.
That said, I will discuss the general question. Alcor's contract is
similar in that regard to CI's. We ask the member to choose what should
be done with the funds if no suspension is possible. The default decision
(i.e., if the member makes no statement to the contrary) is that Alcor
will take from the suspension funding whatever amount necessary to pay for
the failed attempt to locate or recover the member's remains, then the
remainder will be paid to the member's estate.
The member can specifically make other choices, such as:
"I wish Alcor to retain the funds provided for my suspension and
apply them to the Patient Care Fund."
"I wish Alcor to retain the funds provided for my suspension and
apply them to other research related to cryonic suspension and
life extension."
"I wish Alcor to pay the funds to ...... {fill in blank}"
In *my own paperwork*, I have stated that in case of my own non-
suspension, 50% is to be retained by Alcor for various purposes, and 50%
is to be given to my family. This is not political or open to negotiation
by future Directors or Alcor Presidents if I am not suspended. This is MY
decision, just as it is the decision of any other Alcor member to make.
For me personally, as an Alcor President, as a cryonicist for 18 years,
and as someone with dozens of friends in cryonics (several already in
suspension), I want cryonics to work for others even if it cannot work for
me.
As Bob Ettinger stated, there is an inherent risk in BOTH directions.
If the money goes to the family when no suspension is done, there is
incentive for the family not to report a death or to otherwise prevent the
suspension from taking place; if the money goes to the suspension
organization, there is incentive for the organization not to perform a
suspension.
Note, however, that this would be a very *short-term* benefit for
that suspension company. The long-term damage to membership confidence
could be extensive and probably fatal, if it could be shown that a
cryonics company purposely delayed a suspension in order not to do it. In
fact, as Ben Best points out, that decision could ONLY be made by a Board
of Directors and staff who were not interested in suspension for
*themselves*. Based on our contract, such a decision would also be
fraudulent, and open up Alcor and the individuals to criminal and civil
penalties.
By the way, all Alcor Directors, all paid staff, and anyone else with
the least decision-making ability in a suspension ARE fully signed-up
Alcor suspension members.
In any case, it is the Member who chooses in advance which risk is
most important to them.
>From Jim Yount:
>Years ago, a non-800 emergency number was used on the medic alert emblems
>worn by ACS members. For many years we have had a dedicated 800 number
>to make it as easy as possible to call. Does Alcor also imprint its
>medical notification emblems with an 800 emergency response number?
Alcor places on the tag both an 800 number and a local number (since
the 800 number only works in the U.S. and Canada), and it has worked on
several occasions.
>We once experimented with wallet cards which offered a $100 reward for
>calling the number in an emergency. This plan was abandoned as counter
>productive since it was not consistent with other organ donation, and
>might suggest a commercial aspect which could lead to the instructions
>being intentionally ignored by some people. Perhaps the reward idea
>should be revisited?
We have also had the reward concept for several years. I think it
shows we are serious; but thus far we haven't had to pay it. We have
OFFERED to more than once; but the caller has always been a hospital
employee or coroner's official who could not accept the reward (and were
honest enough to say so).
>The emblem service used by Alcor, while not as well known as
>Medic Alert, provides more space on the bracelet itself for more detailed
>instructions. Years ago Alcor made the decision to use this alternate
>emblem. I don't want to revisit old differences, and I am not suggesting
>that Alcor's choice is inferior, however, it is reasonable to inquire
>whether the emblem itself, or its printed instructions, played a part in
>the decision not to call Alcor by those who obviously saw the bracelet?
Since we have people in the Alcor facility 24 hours a day, it seems
better for our members to have a knowledgeable person here answering the
phone. (By the way, that does not mean that the people here never sleep.
They do, so please make your calls to Alcor at reasonable hours of the day
-- say 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. -- if you don't have an emergency.) We have
never known of a problem where a hospital didn't call after seeing the
bracelet, and the instructions have been followed more than once.
I have no information which would lead me to think that the bracelet
had anything to do with the failure to call in this case.
Steve Bridge, President
Alcor Life Extension Foundation
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5480