3 ms·

Terminally ill teen won historic ruling to preserve body

4 points by antouank 10y ago

DanBC 10y ago
Here's a link to the judge's decision: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html This case about cryogenic preservation of a 14 year old has some really sad parts in the decision. The father, dying of cancer, has experienced the death of his child, was unable to see her body after she died, and has suffered the breakdown of his marriage. > Despite this, during the course of the first hearing, the father, who was then unrepresented, changed his position, saying: "I respect the decisions she is making. This is the last and only thing she has asked from me. I would like to have written confirmation that I will not have to pay the costs as I have cancer and I live on benefits." However, by the second hearing, the father was legally represented and his position had changed again. He said that he was prepared to agree to what JS wanted on four conditions: that he and other members of his family could view her body after death; that the mother would not pursue any financial claims against him; that the mother and her family would not make any contact with him and his family; and that he would not be pursued for any contribution to the costs of the cryonic process. The father's last statement at this hearing was that he wants the court to know that he respects JS, and that he will respect the court's decision.
DanBC 10y ago
This bit of the judge's decision should give real concern to people wanting to be crygenically preserved: > (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.

3 ms·

Terminally ill teen won historic ruling to preserve body

4 points by antouank 10y ago

DanBC 10y ago
Here's a link to the judge's decision: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2859.html This case about cryogenic preservation of a 14 year old has some really sad parts in the decision. The father, dying of cancer, has experienced the death of his child, was unable to see her body after she died, and has suffered the breakdown of his marriage. > Despite this, during the course of the first hearing, the father, who was then unrepresented, changed his position, saying: "I respect the decisions she is making. This is the last and only thing she has asked from me. I would like to have written confirmation that I will not have to pay the costs as I have cancer and I live on benefits." However, by the second hearing, the father was legally represented and his position had changed again. He said that he was prepared to agree to what JS wanted on four conditions: that he and other members of his family could view her body after death; that the mother would not pursue any financial claims against him; that the mother and her family would not make any contact with him and his family; and that he would not be pursued for any contribution to the costs of the cryonic process. The father's last statement at this hearing was that he wants the court to know that he respects JS, and that he will respect the court's decision.
DanBC 10y ago
This bit of the judge's decision should give real concern to people wanting to be crygenically preserved: > (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.