> > >Thus my suggestion that a malpractice lawsuit for failure to notify,
> > >inform, recommend, or apply cryonic suspension as a 'final meliorative
> > >clinical intervention against irreversible morbidity'.
> > >
> > >Let's see Peter Jennings smirk at that!
> >
> > Just what Americans need - more reasons to be litigious.
> >
> > I sincerely hope that Extropians can approach their problems more
> ethically.
> What you may object to is the results of litigation that have arisen in the
> US over the last few decades as the web of property rights and rules
> regarding the personal responsibility of plaintiffs that used to be a major
> part of the common law here has eroded. That is not the fault of the basic,
> time-tested system of private enforcement of rights through civil litigation,
> but rather in most cases is the result of legislatures and judges that have
> lost the sense of balance between "civil" rights and property rights that
> marked the central strength of the Anglo-American common law until very
> recent times.
I would also say that you'd be lucky to find a judge who would not throw
the case out as frivolous today. Doesn't mean I think the case would be
frivolous. The closer reanimation gets, the better the chances of the
lawsuit going forward, and the higher the likelihood of public opinion
going the way Greg has recently posted re cloning. The framing of the
poll questions matters much, too.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:39 MDT