Was going to post this in the political banter thread but felt it probably needed one of its own.
The
ruling on the teenage cyronics case is interesting reading. I think the decision in the case was correct. It's not about the rightness of cryonics (we might solve the defrosting part in time, but undoing the 'being dead' bit is for me the stumbling block) but about what someone capable but under the legal age to make a will can request. It's basically the same desire as anyone following a religion with particular post-mortem (or indeed pre-mortem) rituals is after: life after death, albeit with shiny tech rather than incense and chicken entrails.
The postscript made me sad:
Quote:
The Trust expresses very real misgivings about what occurred on the day of JS's death. In brief and understated summary:
(1) On JS's last day, her mother is said to have been preoccupied with the post-mortem arrangements at the expense of being fully available to JS.
(2) The voluntary organisation is said to have been under-equipped and disorganised, resulting in pressure being placed on the hospital to allow procedures that had not been agreed. Although the preparation of JS's body for cryogenic preservation was completed, the way in which the process was handled caused real concern to the medical and mortuary staff.
Register
Calendar
FAQ
Search
