• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Cryonics firm sues Burlington family


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 advancedatheist

  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 06 June 2009 - 08:14 PM


http://www.thehawkey...Cryonics-060609

published online: 6/6/2009

Cryonics firm sues Burlington family

By JOHN MANGALONZO

jmangalonzo@thehawkeye.com

Alcor Life Extension Foundation, a Scottsdale, Ariz.-based non-profit corporation, wants local courts to allow it to disinter a Burlington man so he can be preserved in a cryonic process.

Foundation attorneys said Orville Martin Richardson, who died in February at 81, wanted to donate his remains "not only in the hope of potential revival, but also to prove and perfect the process" of cryonic suspension.

Cryonics is the preservation of human remains -- and sometimes animals -- at very low temperature in the hope that future science can restore them to life, youth and health.

Richardson, according to the lawsuit paid Alcor more than $50,000 in 2004 for a membership and included money in his will. He is buried in Aspen Grove Cemetery.

"I further direct that, when and where possible, such delivery shall take place immediately after my legal death, without embalming or autopsy," Richardson wrote.

He also gave Alcor full custody on his remains "by whatever legal means may be available for the purposes of placing them into cryonic suspension."

Still, Alcor attorneys contend the man's brother, David Richardson of Ohio and his sister Darlene Broeker of West Burlington -- co-admnistrators of the estate -- denied the foundation's request for their brother's remains. They also didn't let Alcor know their brother died until months after he was buried.

David Richardson and Darlene Broeker said in court papers that their brother discussed donating his brain or entire head for cryonic suspension. They said Orville Richardson wanted his head severed and frozen after he died.

The siblings apparently tried to talk their brother out of the idea and "emphatically told him they would have nothing to do with his plan."

Attorneys for the pair said the brother and sister did not see the contract and their late brother never told them of actually making such arrangements. Further, they contend Orville Richardson, on several occasions, failed to meet with the agreement he had with Alcor, which constitutes cancellation of the agreement.

"All evidence indicates that after Orville (Richardson) signed the agreement and wrote his check, he did nothing to honor the agreement or to make sure that his head would be cut off and frozen after his death," attorneys for the siblings said in court papers asking a judge to deny Alcor's request.

They added David Richardson and Darlene Broeker's opposition to their brother's plan is of "low standing."

Cryonics procedures, according to Alcor, should ideally begin within the first one or two minutes after the heart stops, and preferably within 15 minutes.

Richardson directed in his will that Alcor place into suspension any recoverable remains "regardless of the severity of the damage from such causes as fire, decomposition, autopsy, embalming."

"Because time is of the essence to not only preserve Orville's remains at the earliest time, but also prevent further deterioration for the purposes of scientific research, an expedited hearing is requested," Alcor attorneys said.

District Court Judge John Linn will hear both sides at 11:30 a.m. Monday.

If Alcor is granted its motion, it will shoulder the cost to exhume Orville Richardson's remains.

#2 lunarsolarpower

  • Guest
  • 1,323 posts
  • 53
  • Location:BC, Canada

Posted 06 June 2009 - 11:34 PM

It's nice to see Alcor go to bat for one of their members.

#3 advancedatheist

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 06 June 2009 - 11:45 PM

It's nice to see Alcor go to bat for one of their members.


Certainly, but digging up and freezing a member after several months pushes way too many mortality salience buttons to serve as good PR for cryonics. Not to mention that it doesn't help cryonics' reputation with the scientific community.

I wonder if the relatives could quietly exhume and cremate the body to defeat the purpose of the lawsuit.

#4 Shannon Vyff

  • Life Member, Director Lead Moderator
  • 3,897 posts
  • 702
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 07 June 2009 - 12:23 AM

Yeah, I saw this--glad to have an opportunity to comment on it here. I agree with advancedatheist, I worry about the PR, but if you check all the boxes as an Alcor member (not just best case preservation-such as your brain under 24 hours, but in fact any remains that can be recovered) as I have you want to see that Alcor will fight for their and your legal rights. Some may accuse Alcor of doing this for money, but the costs of a court case could vastly outweigh the $50,000 price Richardson was signed for. It was not clear if any other funds would be involved, Alcor would most likely be loosing money on the case. About Richardson's state, it seems that if he was embalmed perhaps there is some preservation of his brain structure in a way that future medicine could read or repair.

#5 advancedatheist

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 07 June 2009 - 12:56 AM

I'd still prefer to see Alcor do these things without its name showing up in the news, if possible. Digging up a grave for a scientific experiment reminds people of the F-word.

#6 Loot Perish

  • Guest
  • 95 posts
  • -22

Posted 07 June 2009 - 02:14 AM

Posted Image

#7 cryoguy

  • Guest
  • 10 posts
  • 0

Posted 07 June 2009 - 03:03 AM

On the Cold Filter discussion list, Luke Parrish wrote

The guy wanted preserved. He had a right to that. An inalienable right, insofar as it could have kept him alive. Denying him that right is like murder (perhaps it is murder). The family crossed the line, and ought to be sued for all they've got. But apparently Alcor is just trying to get the body so they can preserve what's left of it -- an honourable attempt, even though they are fully aware it is probably too late. It's important for the principle of the thing.

Don't people get it?

We have a right to be decapitated and experimented on after we die!

If we don't fight for that right, what other right will we lose?

Freedom of speech?

Freedom to assemble?

Freedom of the press?

What of our right to life itself? Will that be taken from us too?

Just because some people don't like it, that doesn't mean you can't have your body treated in whatever way you like as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. The guy just wanted his brain placed in biostasis -- not like he wanted his body parts distributed over the neighbor's lawn or something...



#8 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 June 2009 - 03:40 AM

...not like he wanted his body parts distributed over the neighbor's lawn or something.

You know, I'd never considered that as an option, but I think I would like my body parts distributed over my neighbor's lawn.

#9 Heliotrope

  • Guest
  • 1,145 posts
  • 0

Posted 07 June 2009 - 04:37 AM

the guy's family didn't let Alcor know after his legal death for months. I guess his body's too far gone and brain rotted, completely unsalvageable, unless he wants a clone living on

#10 Luke Parrish

  • Guest
  • 140 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Salem, OR

Posted 09 June 2009 - 12:28 AM

I'd still prefer to see Alcor do these things without its name showing up in the news, if possible. Digging up a grave for a scientific experiment reminds people of the F-word.

About time one of these tragically unacceptable cases winds up in the news. The more publicity this gets the better. Do you think the non-cryonicist news media even noticed, or cared, when Marce Johnson died and got cremated against her will?

This has been happening all over the place -- the world is apparently chock-full of non-cryo people who refuse to take the cryo person's dying wishes seriously.

Yet the mainstream media apparently only cares about cases like Ted Williams where someone claims he didn't want to be preserved, despite documentation to the opposite. (As if the default action should be to destroy a body rather than preserve it.) Well, what about all the cases where the person does want to be preserved and isn't? Isn't this at least as bad?

And more to the point, isn't that potentially equal to murder?

Shouldn't the news media be all over this, every time it happens?

You're all moaning "PR disaster -- Alcor is getting egg on their face" as if Alcor was the one with a duty to protect its image from the slightest bit of tarnish, as opposed to being the news media's job to give a fair and accurate treatment of the subject.

Do you think Rosa Parks "tarnished the image" of black people when she refused to give up her seat in a bus to a white man?

People know Frankenstein is just a story. This is 2009, after all. They see reanimations of cardiac arrest all the time, not to mention hypothermia. What they don't realize is that cryonics is a serious matter to its adherents, and that we will fight for our right to be treated with dignity and respect, even by those who do not agree with our beliefs.

#11 Loot Perish

  • Guest
  • 95 posts
  • -22

Posted 09 June 2009 - 03:36 PM

well, Luke Parrish, you are a regular Dr Frankenstein, there. In your honor, I have made a photoshop of your face on the Dr Frankenstein "IT'S ALIVE" photo from above. Should I post it here?

Edited by Reverend_X, 09 June 2009 - 03:36 PM.


#12 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 09 June 2009 - 04:52 PM

I'd still prefer to see Alcor do these things without its name showing up in the news, if possible. Digging up a grave for a scientific experiment reminds people of the F-word.

About time one of these tragically unacceptable cases winds up in the news. The more publicity this gets the better. Do you think the non-cryonicist news media even noticed, or cared, when Marce Johnson died and got cremated against her will?

Yeah, what a brave new world we live in, when as soon as I pass away others have the right to rape my body and my right to self-ownership.

And more to the point, isn't that potentially equal to murder?

Shouldn't the news media be all over this, every time it happens?

Technically it's not murder, but definitely a crime of the same calibre. I think the comparison to rape is pretty fitting.

well, Luke Parrish, you are a regular Dr Frankenstein, there. In your honor, I have made a photoshop of your face on the Dr Frankenstein "IT'S ALIVE" photo from above. Should I post it here?

Go away troll.

Edited by kismet, 09 June 2009 - 04:53 PM.


#13 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,047 posts
  • 2,004
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 09 June 2009 - 05:42 PM

It might be bad PR in many respects but it is NECESSARY that Alcor pursue this. Letting this go would create a precedent that might lead to a cascading series of negative legal blows to cryonics as a whole. Go Alcor!

#14 Loot Perish

  • Guest
  • 95 posts
  • -22

Posted 09 June 2009 - 07:20 PM

well, Luke Parrish, you are a regular Dr Frankenstein, there. In your honor, I have made a photoshop of your face on the Dr Frankenstein "IT'S ALIVE" photo from above. Should I post it here?

Go away troll.



oh, I am sorry. Were you all trying to have a S-E-R-I-O-U-S discussion? Can I please join in?

I can make noises like a young transhumanist, too! Watch:
Well, I believe strongly that Alcor ought to go ahead with this lawsuit because that is what Ayn Rand would have done. Also, I wrote an AI program and asked it whether Alcor should do this, and program said "YES"!

#15 Luke Parrish

  • Guest
  • 140 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Salem, OR

Posted 09 June 2009 - 08:46 PM

Technically it's not murder, but definitely a crime of the same calibre. I think the comparison to rape is pretty fitting.

Legally it's not murder of course. But if the person is technically alive, isn't it technically murder?

Abortion opponents are willing to accuse abortionists of murder without having legally defined the fetus as a human being. So if they are entitled to their opinion that abortion is murder, am I entitled to my opinion that preventing cryonics is murder?

#16 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 June 2009 - 10:40 PM

Technically it's not murder, but definitely a crime of the same calibre. I think the comparison to rape is pretty fitting.

Legally it's not murder of course. But if the person is technically alive, isn't it technically murder?

Abortion opponents are willing to accuse abortionists of murder without having legally defined the fetus as a human being. So if they are entitled to their opinion that abortion is murder, am I entitled to my opinion that preventing cryonics is murder?



After 3 months, it's pointless. Alcor should spend its resources protecting those that have already been frozen. This is just going to bring bad PR.

#17 Luke Parrish

  • Guest
  • 140 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Salem, OR

Posted 09 June 2009 - 11:54 PM

After 3 months, it's pointless. Alcor should spend its resources protecting those that have already been frozen. This is just going to bring bad PR.


They already laugh at us every day... So why rock the boat?

Well, if we don't they'll just keep laughing.

I don't feel very like this was murder. I don't even feel like it was deliberately disrespectful.

I feel like it was in reality just stupid.

And it's going to keep happening that way for as long as people think it's okay to make fun of cryonicists and disregard their silly little delusions. They don't see cryonics as real, they think of it as science-fiction. They think they could never go to court over it. They can't fathom that we are serious about it, or even that it is something a normal person possibly could take seriously. It's la-la land.

Maybe that's why the siblings think they deserve to get back the $50,000 that their brother paid for the treatment. The money they would have had to surrender if they had respected his wishes.

Waste of good money, they're thinking. Why pay for the dead when you can pay for the living?

Besides, he didn't really want cryopreserved... He must have just been going through a phase or something. Nobody normal would want to be floating upside-down in a tank when they could be lying peacefully on their back in a coffin under six feet of God's good earth... Would they?

#18 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 10 June 2009 - 12:23 AM

I couldn't agree more. Cryonics needs to completely stop worrying about bad pr because any mention of cryonics is automatically bad pr. The solution is not to hide under a rock. We should be proud of what we do and act like it. Cryonics is a chance where no other chance exists, and its worth fighting for.

After 3 months, it's pointless. Alcor should spend its resources protecting those that have already been frozen. This is just going to bring bad PR.


They already laugh at us every day... So why rock the boat?

Well, if we don't they'll just keep laughing.

I don't feel very like this was murder. I don't even feel like it was deliberately disrespectful.

I feel like it was in reality just stupid.

And it's going to keep happening that way for as long as people think it's okay to make fun of cryonicists and disregard their silly little delusions. They don't see cryonics as real, they think of it as science-fiction. They think they could never go to court over it. They can't fathom that we are serious about it, or even that it is something a normal person possibly could take seriously. It's la-la land.

Maybe that's why the siblings think they deserve to get back the $50,000 that their brother paid for the treatment. The money they would have had to surrender if they had respected his wishes.

Waste of good money, they're thinking. Why pay for the dead when you can pay for the living?

Besides, he didn't really want cryopreserved... He must have just been going through a phase or something. Nobody normal would want to be floating upside-down in a tank when they could be lying peacefully on their back in a coffin under six feet of God's good earth... Would they?



#19 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 10 June 2009 - 01:34 AM

I couldn't agree more. Cryonics needs to completely stop worrying about bad pr because any mention of cryonics is automatically bad pr. The solution is not to hide under a rock. We should be proud of what we do and act like it. Cryonics is a chance where no other chance exists, and its worth fighting for.

After 3 months, it's pointless. Alcor should spend its resources protecting those that have already been frozen. This is just going to bring bad PR.


They already laugh at us every day... So why rock the boat?

Well, if we don't they'll just keep laughing.

I don't feel very like this was murder. I don't even feel like it was deliberately disrespectful.

I feel like it was in reality just stupid.

And it's going to keep happening that way for as long as people think it's okay to make fun of cryonicists and disregard their silly little delusions. They don't see cryonics as real, they think of it as science-fiction. They think they could never go to court over it. They can't fathom that we are serious about it, or even that it is something a normal person possibly could take seriously. It's la-la land.

Maybe that's why the siblings think they deserve to get back the $50,000 that their brother paid for the treatment. The money they would have had to surrender if they had respected his wishes.

Waste of good money, they're thinking. Why pay for the dead when you can pay for the living?

Besides, he didn't really want cryopreserved... He must have just been going through a phase or something. Nobody normal would want to be floating upside-down in a tank when they could be lying peacefully on their back in a coffin under six feet of God's good earth... Would they?



After 3 months, there's no way they could save that guy. Were they seriously going to try to preserve the body? (btw, I don't think cryonics is a foolish idea, it's the best last resort we have...)

#20 kismet

  • Guest
  • 2,984 posts
  • 424
  • Location:Austria, Vienna

Posted 10 June 2009 - 01:11 PM

oh, I am sorry. Were you all trying to have a S-E-R-I-O-U-S discussion? Can I please join in?

I can make noises like a young transhumanist, too! Watch:
Well, I believe strongly that Alcor ought to go ahead with this lawsuit because that is what Ayn Rand would have done. Also, I wrote an AI program and asked it whether Alcor should do this, and program said "YES"!

I just wasn't sure if you were serious or trolling. Thank you for clearing that up, you are trolling. Have a nice day.

After 3 months, there's no way they could save that guy. Were they seriously going to try to preserve the body? (btw, I don't think cryonics is a foolish idea, it's the best last resort we have...)

It's not about "preserving" the rotten remains so that the same person can be revived, because this is impossible as pointed out. I think and hope it's about honouring people's autonomy over their own body before and after death. Why should we allow family members (or anyone else for that matter) to rape our right to self-ownership after our death? Although, after 3 months it does get absurd, but it is essential that this right will be honoured seconds, minutes and hours after death to enable cryopreservation.

Edited by kismet, 10 June 2009 - 01:41 PM.


#21 Luke Parrish

  • Guest
  • 140 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Salem, OR

Posted 10 June 2009 - 02:17 PM

It's not about "preserving" the rotten remains so that the same person can be revived, because this is impossible as pointed out. I think and hope it's about honouring people's autonomy over their own body before and after death. Why should we allow family members (or anyone else for that matter) to rape our right to self-ownership after our death? Although, after 3 months it does get absurd, but it is essential that this right will be honoured seconds, minutes and hours after death to enable cryopreservation.


Exactly. Nobody thinks the body will yield any scientific value or be reanimated. At least, nobody thinks of it as highly probable. But the point is that if someone is nominally dead and wanted to be cryopreserved you don't just let them rot because you "said you wouldn't have anything to do with it."

My suspicion is that they didn't call Alcor about it because they felt there was some chance of getting the $50,000 back. Since they felt there was zero chance that this had any validity whatsoever, they may have simply seen this as a way to recover the damage done by their brother's gullibility.

That's what we have to stop, in my opinion -- the widely-held perception that we cryonicists are just a bunch of gullible saps. It's demeaning and harmful, as this case illustrates. The siblings may have actually killed their brother, which is a horrible thing to say, but is quite possibly true based on our understanding of science.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users