Danielle Baker
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:26 pm
Zoltan Istvan just contributed an article to Quartz:
https://qz.com/1555363/cryogenics-is-fa ... servation/
I'm quoted in it. While the quotes are technically accurate, I'm not sure the context is accurate. I think the best thing to do here is to just list out what I think are the areas of potential misunderstanding:
"Eric Homeyer, a volunteer representative of Oregon Cryonics"
Well, not exactly. He was a volunteer, and he did put in a lot of effort, but he was most definitely not a representative of Oregon Cryonics.
"Deutsch is incorrect in saying that any laws were broken in Kentucky"
I think the law was broken.
"The coroner always follows the wishes of the next of kin"
I was stating the policy of this particular coroner. I was not in any way implying that the policy of this coroner was ethical or legal.
"the great majority of US states don’t abide by cryonics contracts"
Nobody needs to abide by a contract except the two parties to the contract. A contract does not obligate any third party to do anything.
"creation of ... a legally binding framework of rules and guidelines that US states would implement to respect and honor ... Documents of Gift."
Those legally binding rules already exist as the UAGA, but people don't usually object at the funeral home, so it's not usually an issue. We don't need any new laws. If it had been a local case or a case with adequate finances, there might have been a better chance of fighting the family with something like an injunction, for example. We clearly explained that the rights of Oregon Cryonics were superior to the rights of the next of kin.
My final comment on this case is that I am absolutely stunned by the depth of evil in the coroner and funeral director, Doug Bowling. I thought I had seen everything. I didn't think anyone could stoop lower than some of the BS I've witnessed in the past. I thought professionals had certain standards. And then I had the pleasure of interacting with Doug Bowling. He was aware of the Document of Gift and the wishes of Danielle, but he just decided to disregard those wishes and deliberately violate very clear state statutes. This experience has affected me deeply. I didn't think I could get any more cynical or distrusting, but this event pushed me even further down that path. Doug is a sorry excuse for a human. Since there are probably a lot of "Dougs" out there, it's very important not to end up as a coroner's case.
https://qz.com/1555363/cryogenics-is-fa ... servation/
I'm quoted in it. While the quotes are technically accurate, I'm not sure the context is accurate. I think the best thing to do here is to just list out what I think are the areas of potential misunderstanding:
"Eric Homeyer, a volunteer representative of Oregon Cryonics"
Well, not exactly. He was a volunteer, and he did put in a lot of effort, but he was most definitely not a representative of Oregon Cryonics.
"Deutsch is incorrect in saying that any laws were broken in Kentucky"
I think the law was broken.
"The coroner always follows the wishes of the next of kin"
I was stating the policy of this particular coroner. I was not in any way implying that the policy of this coroner was ethical or legal.
"the great majority of US states don’t abide by cryonics contracts"
Nobody needs to abide by a contract except the two parties to the contract. A contract does not obligate any third party to do anything.
"creation of ... a legally binding framework of rules and guidelines that US states would implement to respect and honor ... Documents of Gift."
Those legally binding rules already exist as the UAGA, but people don't usually object at the funeral home, so it's not usually an issue. We don't need any new laws. If it had been a local case or a case with adequate finances, there might have been a better chance of fighting the family with something like an injunction, for example. We clearly explained that the rights of Oregon Cryonics were superior to the rights of the next of kin.
My final comment on this case is that I am absolutely stunned by the depth of evil in the coroner and funeral director, Doug Bowling. I thought I had seen everything. I didn't think anyone could stoop lower than some of the BS I've witnessed in the past. I thought professionals had certain standards. And then I had the pleasure of interacting with Doug Bowling. He was aware of the Document of Gift and the wishes of Danielle, but he just decided to disregard those wishes and deliberately violate very clear state statutes. This experience has affected me deeply. I didn't think I could get any more cynical or distrusting, but this event pushed me even further down that path. Doug is a sorry excuse for a human. Since there are probably a lot of "Dougs" out there, it's very important not to end up as a coroner's case.