Suppose that we've more or less perfected cryogenic suspension.
People can be deep frozen and held in that state indefinitely.
Thawing is more problematic. Some percentage of frozen "people" fail
to be revivified at all. Of those who are, all require five to ten
years of intensive and expensive rehabilitation before the vast
majority resume a normal life. While suspended, a "person" has no
functional characteristics of being human at all: "their" metabolism
is entirely inactive.
Now, given this, under what circumstances would it be morally
acceptable to pull the plug on a freezer and allow the "person"
inside to thaw without further intervention to a state in which
return to life is impossible? Is it ever acceptable to keep a
"person" suspended indefinitely?
For example, suppose Alice's husband Bob has become frozen in an
accident and Alice can't afford to pay for his rehabilitation without
major changes to her lifestyle. Is it acceptable for her to
destructively thaw him or keep him in suspension for many decades?
Rich
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
