It seems the main piece of work in either case is to promote cryonics & qualify it as medical procedure (your suggestion #1). Then, once sufficiently popular, suddenly it's in euthanasia providers' interest to facilitate this complementary service.
You achieve the outcome without the extra lobbying and enforcement.
I think mandating it for non-terminally ill patients who want (or claim they want, go along with, etc.) euthanasia will nullify most of the arguments against these edge cases, which are also consistently the most controversial ones and tarry euthanasia broadly in the court of public opinion.
"I lean against legalizing euthanasia for physically healthy people with crippling depression or “unhappiness”". I disagree strongly. Many people face horrific depression or anxiety -- these conditions are hard to comprehend in their misery if you have not experienced them. Often these resist treatment. Forcing people to either endure this hell or permanently kill themselves seems extremely harsh.
When I was Alcor's President, we had more than one suicide case. One was especially remarkable because the individual's preparations were very clearly intended to maximize his chances of getting cryopreserved. After leaving ample evidence of what was to happen (to minimize autopsy risk), he carefully shot himself in the heart. The Alcor team was able to retrieve him and his brain was successfully cryoprotected. That is a person who could not bear living with his condition but understood that it should be curable in the future. Why deprive such a person of a renewed future?
Great read; why force a legal obligation though?
It seems the main piece of work in either case is to promote cryonics & qualify it as medical procedure (your suggestion #1). Then, once sufficiently popular, suddenly it's in euthanasia providers' interest to facilitate this complementary service.
You achieve the outcome without the extra lobbying and enforcement.
I think mandating it for non-terminally ill patients who want (or claim they want, go along with, etc.) euthanasia will nullify most of the arguments against these edge cases, which are also consistently the most controversial ones and tarry euthanasia broadly in the court of public opinion.
Hello Anatoly-Regarding gene enhancement for IQ, what would be the rough cost and its availability? thanks,JC
Only about 500 people in the world are cryopreserved. A very low number! We need to pump those numbers up!
Do you plan to write a piece on countering the ideologically-captured bioethics mob sometime in the not-too-distant future?
"I lean against legalizing euthanasia for physically healthy people with crippling depression or “unhappiness”". I disagree strongly. Many people face horrific depression or anxiety -- these conditions are hard to comprehend in their misery if you have not experienced them. Often these resist treatment. Forcing people to either endure this hell or permanently kill themselves seems extremely harsh.
When I was Alcor's President, we had more than one suicide case. One was especially remarkable because the individual's preparations were very clearly intended to maximize his chances of getting cryopreserved. After leaving ample evidence of what was to happen (to minimize autopsy risk), he carefully shot himself in the heart. The Alcor team was able to retrieve him and his brain was successfully cryoprotected. That is a person who could not bear living with his condition but understood that it should be curable in the future. Why deprive such a person of a renewed future?