SeaHorse81
Contributor
In another thread there was a bit of dialog about the language we use when we discuss DCS hits, and the consequences of that language. Rather than derail that thread, Id like to talk about it here. I know this isnt the first time weve had this particular conversation, but I think it bears periodic review.
It is my perception that the diving community in general takes a judgmental stance toward DCS hits, as evidenced by the words deserved and undeserved. If a hit happened, it must be because somebody made a mistake, misjudged something, failed to accurately predict conditions, failed to make themselves physically prepared for safe diving, or some other failing.
To the best of my knowledge, there are some hits that nobody ever figures out. Clearly, there was a reason it occurred, but it cant be nailed down. Educated guesses ensue.
Lets assume for the sake of argument that every single DCS hit can indeed be traced to diver behavior and choice. Every last one. Lets certainly include those people who are train wrecks in gear that anybody could predict might be likely to get hit. Lets include the arrogant jerks who think the laws of physics and physiology dont apply to them. Of course were also talking about all the nice people who try to keep themselves sharp and prepared, but who are not perfect.
Heres the problem with the judgmental language: It can only add to the denial that every diver initially experiences when noticing the early symptoms of DCS. Adding to the denial adds to delay in starting treatment, which can only reduce the efficacy of treatment. Given that permanent neurological damage or worse is on the table, I believe that we need to make it as easy as possible for people to come forward. Ideally, wed create a climate of, Lets see if we can figure out how this happened, rather than, Lets see if we can figure out how you screwed up. Then if it is indeed a screw-up, that can be acknowledged and assessed. How about innocent until proven guilty, if youre of that mindset?
Lets say, as someone whose opinion I respect did, that it is disingenuous to use descriptive language for this rather than judgmental language. Whats still on the table is possible disability, the inability to remain employed and support ones family, the inability to fully raise ones children, the unavailability of one for the assistance of aging parents, etc. Most of us are connected to other people who will also be deeply affected by any DCS hit we happen to take. For the sake of all those connections, I think being disingenuous if it gets somebody into treatment sooner is an outstanding result. Sign me up.
If none of that means anything, how about this? If somebody is slower getting to treatment, theyre more likely to end up officially disabled and being supported in part by all of us. Its in our personal interest for others to get treated sooner rather than later.
Personally, Im not okay with saying anybody deserves neurological damage. Well, maybe pedophiles, arsonists, murderers and the like, but certainly not divers who may not have done everything properly while pursuing recreation. Regardless, its about minimizing the damage and collateral damage as much as possible.
Thats my thinking, for what its worth. Thanks for listening.
It is my perception that the diving community in general takes a judgmental stance toward DCS hits, as evidenced by the words deserved and undeserved. If a hit happened, it must be because somebody made a mistake, misjudged something, failed to accurately predict conditions, failed to make themselves physically prepared for safe diving, or some other failing.
To the best of my knowledge, there are some hits that nobody ever figures out. Clearly, there was a reason it occurred, but it cant be nailed down. Educated guesses ensue.
Lets assume for the sake of argument that every single DCS hit can indeed be traced to diver behavior and choice. Every last one. Lets certainly include those people who are train wrecks in gear that anybody could predict might be likely to get hit. Lets include the arrogant jerks who think the laws of physics and physiology dont apply to them. Of course were also talking about all the nice people who try to keep themselves sharp and prepared, but who are not perfect.
Heres the problem with the judgmental language: It can only add to the denial that every diver initially experiences when noticing the early symptoms of DCS. Adding to the denial adds to delay in starting treatment, which can only reduce the efficacy of treatment. Given that permanent neurological damage or worse is on the table, I believe that we need to make it as easy as possible for people to come forward. Ideally, wed create a climate of, Lets see if we can figure out how this happened, rather than, Lets see if we can figure out how you screwed up. Then if it is indeed a screw-up, that can be acknowledged and assessed. How about innocent until proven guilty, if youre of that mindset?
Lets say, as someone whose opinion I respect did, that it is disingenuous to use descriptive language for this rather than judgmental language. Whats still on the table is possible disability, the inability to remain employed and support ones family, the inability to fully raise ones children, the unavailability of one for the assistance of aging parents, etc. Most of us are connected to other people who will also be deeply affected by any DCS hit we happen to take. For the sake of all those connections, I think being disingenuous if it gets somebody into treatment sooner is an outstanding result. Sign me up.
If none of that means anything, how about this? If somebody is slower getting to treatment, theyre more likely to end up officially disabled and being supported in part by all of us. Its in our personal interest for others to get treated sooner rather than later.
Personally, Im not okay with saying anybody deserves neurological damage. Well, maybe pedophiles, arsonists, murderers and the like, but certainly not divers who may not have done everything properly while pursuing recreation. Regardless, its about minimizing the damage and collateral damage as much as possible.
Thats my thinking, for what its worth. Thanks for listening.
