Non professional divers taking very young children diving (even in a pool)

[widget]

I think it is fairly clear that Tammy is only doing what her shop expects. And her shop is probably fairly typical. That is, Scuba Shop / Scuba Police Station.

Can you imaging a car stopping at a gas station with a child not in a child seat and the station refusing to sell the driver gas??? And that is actually involves an illegal act rather than just not endorsed by some training agency.

Their shop, their rules. I would opt to spend my $$$ elsewhere. Not an attack on Tammy. Just a fairly common detractor of Scuba gear and training retail operations.

I almost ran out of "Likes" with this post.

 

[Seya]

No one has said it is a death sentence. I have repeatedly said there is not that much risk, but there is a risk.

According to your profile, you have been certified for 5 years, but you provide no other details. I am glad that in your 5 years you have accumulated enough knowledge and experience to be more skilled than instructors and to insult me and others in this thread with your repeated accusation that we are "Internet divers." Insulting your opposition is not usually considered a valid form of argumentation. You should try the valid forms before resorting to mockery. You may find it more effective. By the way, some of the people in this thread have been in the water a few times.



In which of those sports is it possible to do the equivalent of dying after swimming a distance of 4-5 feet in your family pool?

Again, it is highly unlikely that anything will happen in this case, but you cannot dismiss the possibility.

---------- Post added June 18th, 2015 at 09:17 AM ----------

Just as a minor correction, Tammy's agency is SSI, not PADI.

well then you should know it's not against the law to dive without a license. Maybe the guy could sue the girl for discrimination for not renting him the tank.

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk

 

[Lorenzoid]

I think it is fairly clear that Tammy is only doing what her shop expects. And her shop is probably fairly typical. That is, Scuba Shop / Scuba Police Station.

Can you imaging a car stopping at a gas station with a child not in a child seat and the station refusing to sell the driver gas??? And that is actually involves an illegal act rather than just not endorsed by some training agency.

Their shop, their rules. I would opt to spend my $$$ elsewhere. Not an attack on Tammy. Just a fairly common detractor of Scuba gear and training retail operations.

The child seat hypothetical is interesting. If I were the gas station employee, I might indeed consider notifying the police. The employee doesn't necessarily have to withhold selling the gas, since there is a mechanism in place for promoting safety: laws and police. I hate to say it, but in some ways I DO think a dive shop is wise to assume a role in promoting safety, since there are (thankfully?) no Scuba Police. Protecting oneself and one's business against potential liability is a good motivator, but maybe there's a place for altruism, too. Nobody wants to see anyone else get hurt.

I think a sticking point in this conservation is that we don't really have a good idea of the risk involved in these activities. Speaking for myself, "I don't know what I don't know" about a kid breathing off scuba in a pool. At first blush, it seems safe enough to me--but maybe deceptively so. I just don't know. And because I don't know, I think I'd take a pass on taking part in this. I can't really put mind in the place of a kindly old grandparent with considerable lifetime scuba experience, but I'd like to think I would still take a pass. Again, I'm just speaking for myself, and not criticizing anyone else who decides to do differently. Maybe some of you people have whatever it takes to do it and have looked at it carefully from all the angles and reached a reasonable conclusion.

Different activities/situations carry different risk. Some risks we think we have a pretty good feel for, such as the likelihood of that particular car crashing while that particular kid is not in a child seat. But what if a clearly very drunk driver pulled up at the gas station? Should the manager sell him the gas? In that situation, I can't imagine any responsible employee not at least calling the police, if not trying to stall the driver--maybe indeed shut off the pump remotely.

 

[victorzamora]

The child seat hypothetical is interesting. If I were the gas station employee, I might indeed consider notifying the police. The employee doesn't necessarily have to withhold selling the gas, since there is a mechanism in place for promoting safety: laws and police. I hate to say it, but in some ways I DO think a dive shop is wise to assume a role in promoting safety, since there are (thankfully?) no Scuba Police. Protecting oneself and one's business against potential liability is a good motivator, but maybe there's a place for altruism, too. Nobody wants to see anyone else get hurt.

The issue with a business assuming responsibility is that they then become more liable if something goes wrong. My ideal shop policy would be "standard scuba industry convention is to require a c-card for gas fills, with the exception of paintball. Provide tank rental if c-card is provided, tank fill if c-card is provided and tanks are in VIP and hydro per standards and DOT (respectively). Exceptions apply for paintball. " The instant you say you'll only rent tanks if you deem the person worthy of receiving it per subjective rules you can be asked why you didn't know better. If you do it objectively, your defense is "following shop policy based on industry convention. "

 

[Lorenzoid]

The issue with a business assuming responsibility is that they then become more liable if something goes wrong.

I agree with that. You quoted what I said about the gas station hypothetical. Refusing to do business with someone is not "assuming responsibility."

My ideal shop policy would be "standard scuba industry convention is to require a c-card for gas fills, with the exception of paintball. Provide tank rental if c-card is provided, tank fill if c-card is provided and tanks are in VIP and hydro per standards and DOT (respectively). Exceptions apply for paintball. " The instant you say you'll only rent tanks if you deem the person worthy of receiving it per subjective rules you can be asked why you didn't know better. If you do it objectively, your defense is "following shop policy based on industry convention. "

And I agree with that. As I said in a comment yesterday, a shop would be wise not to ask any questions beyond "May I see your c-card?"

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

The child seat hypothetical is interesting. If I were the gas station employee, I might indeed consider notifying the police. The employee doesn't necessarily have to withhold selling the gas, since there is a mechanism in place for promoting safety: laws and police. I hate to say it, but in some ways I DO think a dive shop is wise to assume a role in promoting safety, since there are (thankfully?) no Scuba Police. Protecting oneself and one's business against potential liability is a good motivator, but maybe there's a place for altruism, too. Nobody wants to see anyone else get hurt.

I think a sticking point in this conservation is that we don't really have a good idea of the risk involved in these activities. Speaking for myself, "I don't know what I don't know" about a kid breathing off scuba in a pool. At first blush, it seems safe enough to me--but maybe deceptively so. I just don't know. And because I don't know, I think I'd take a pass on taking part in this. I can't really put mind in the place of a kindly old grandparent with considerable lifetime scuba experience, but I'd like to think I would still take a pass. Again, I'm just speaking for myself, and not criticizing anyone else who decides to do differently. Maybe some of you people have whatever it takes to do it and have looked at it carefully from all the angles and reached a reasonable conclusion.

Different activities/situations carry different risk. Some risks we think we have a pretty good feel for, such as the likelihood of that particular car crashing while that particular kid is not in a child seat. But what if a clearly very drunk driver pulled up at the gas station? Should the manager sell him the gas? In that situation, I can't imagine any responsible employee not at least calling the police, if not trying to stall the driver--maybe indeed shut off the pump remotely.

Ok - so just talking here - think of you in the shallow end able to stand up with a tank and reg with a mask (no fins) just bare feet. Not being able to go past the first drain because that is the rule - because you know you can stand up before the first drain. Now think of an adult in the water with you so you get the hang of it - breathing on the reg - holding the bottle and just kicking around. Now the adult gets cold and your lips are turning blue because you dont have a heated pool - time to go... Boy wasnt that fun?

The rest of your message I want to leave alone because this is where you and I - agree to disagree...

 

[packrat12]

..While this is a recommendation, if training agencies limit a junior diver's excursion's with an instructor - would a prudent parent - lacking an instructor certification and training - choose to exceed those limitations? Hopefully not.

Prudent is not going in the water as there are dangers there. Prudence is better based on experience, skill and maturity (whether and adult or youth) than an age or specific certification. And I would rather have a skilled youth than a immature and reckless adult any day. Parents are the best source for prudence with their children! We must make decisions every day for them and know their true limitations better than anyone else.

Specifically I was commending on your comment "I showed him the depth limitations for Jr. Open Water Divers in the Instructor Manual" which is patently false or misleading information. I am sorry but as a CFI in flying, I may not always agree with a FAR but I would quote it exactly and then state "but I/PADI recommend..." and then explain the reasoning. Giving false or misleading reasons is disingenuous and leads to distrust. As a father of a diver, I have had numerous instructors quote 'limitations' as if they are the law, they are not. They also use these as excuses which is wrong. The fact is there are no limitations in diving, only recommendations and these should be heeded based on skill and experience. Part of this is based on my own experience years ago when as an Open water with about 500 dives including deep I was given a hard time by a dive shop (reasons included), but they had no problem with my newly minted AOW buddy with a grand total of 9 dives... most of them with me! We need to put common sense back into diving and dive training.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Ok - so just talking here - think of you in the shallow end able to stand up with a tank and reg with a mask (no fins) just bare feet. Not being able to go past the first drain because that is the rule - because you know you can stand up before the first drain. Now think of an adult in the water with you so you get the hang of it - breathing on the reg - holding the bottle and just kicking around. Now the adult gets cold and your lips are turning blue because you dont have a heated pool - time to go... Boy wasnt that fun?

I'm sure it would be fun. It isn't like I didn't do things clearly far more risky when I was a kid.

 

[BFRedrocks]

Sorry if I missed this in the 185+ replies to the OP, but (in all seriousness) what is the inherent risk of having a child (not a 5 yr old, but let's say a mildly semi-mature 12 yr old) breath off scuba gear with a certified parent at a depth of 8 ft? Is the issue that if the child released him/her self from the reg and "bolted" the 7-8 ft to the surface while holding their breath that they would get an embolism or lung overexpansion injury?

 

[redacted]

Sorry if I missed this in the 185+ replies to the OP, but (in all seriousness) what is the inherent risk of having a child (not a 5 yr old, but let's say a mildly semi-mature 12 yr old) breath off scuba gear with a certified parent at a depth of 8 ft? Is the issue that if the child released him/her self from the reg and "bolted" the 7-8 ft to the surface while holding their breath that they would get an embolism or lung overexpansion injury?

Yes, that is the primary risk and it is probably little different for a 12 Y/O than a 5 Y/O. There are a number of options to control that risk either through close supervision or by controlling depth (like 2 ft or less).