Rescue or ???

[Esprise Me]

Stephen Martin was charged with homicide when his girlfriend died, probably from immersion pulmonary edema: Scuba enthusiast fights extradition to Malta over dive deaths

Interesting case. The article seems to indicate it was his experience, rather than his certification, that put him in the crosshairs. This article indicates that he was an instructor, and that the charges were eventually dropped: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-sussex-35350295

It seems like you'd need a perfect storm of extremely unlikely events for this to be an issue. How many of us have been on a dive where someone was killed or injured badly enough to sue (or for the state to bring criminal charges)? How often does the injured diver/victim's family/state go after the buddy, or other amateurs on the dive, as opposed to only going after the pros involved? What are the odds that, if they did, they would drop the suit upon finding out you were only AOW (and wouldn't find out that you'd done the rescue course but declined the cert, or that you'd read the book and worked with an instructor informally, or that they wouldn't try to use that against you), whereas they'd pursue you to the ends of the earth if you had taken Rescue? And all of this, of course, is assuming the Rescue course didn't make the difference in the first place in allowing you to save them.

Also, I'm way out of my depth here so don't take any of this for anything even approaching advice, but... in the U.S., there is generally no duty to rescue absent certain circumstances, such as a special relationship to the victim (haven't yet found any authority on whether scuba buddies count for this; they might). But another such circumstance that can confer a duty to rescue is if you initiate and then abandon a rescue, the logic being that you might have preempted someone else who could have rescued the person. If Rescue teaches you your limits and keeps you from starting something you can't finish, might it actually give you some legal protection?

 

[Storker]

This article indicates that he was an instructor, and that the charges were eventually dropped: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-sussex-35350295

Yep. But it looked quite bad for quite a while. Imagine losing your SO in a diving accident where you did your very best to save them and then being charged for homicide. And then your club's agency throws you under the bus because they've quietly changed the insurance coverage you used to have through your membership.

It seems like you'd need a perfect storm of extremely unlikely events for this to be an issue

No perfect storm needed. You just need a tragic accident and an incompetent prosecutor with an axe to grind.

 

[Diving Dubai]

You also need a sense of perspective, after all a minor lapse in judgement whilst driving (something most of us do daily) can in the right/wrong circumstances end up with you being tried and jailed.

 

[happy-diver]

and when asked what most of the inmates were in for, the Governor replied

“Talking!”

 

[Esprise Me]

What I meant by "for this to be an issue" was "for the Rescue cert to be the thing that sinks you," as I thought the rest of my post made clear. The question was not whether to have insurance, or whether to dive with a particular person who seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen, or whether to talk to a lawyer or financial advisor about putting your assets into trusts to protect them in the event of a lawsuit, or whether to travel to a particular country with a reputation for human rights violations. The question was whether to get Rescue certified in light of the possible additional legal exposure that might create. That particular scenario, where you end up wishing you hadn't gotten the cert, is what strikes me as unlikely. I'm open to hearing reasons or evidence to the contrary, but please respond to what I actually said.

 

[txaggie08]

The Rescue class quality depends on the instructor, not the agency.

Individual instructors may go farther, but the course requirements are by agency.

I also distinctly remember being taught how to do compressions in the water, and nearly drowning my "volunteer". Many, many others remember that as well...

 

[tursiops]

I also distinctly remember being taught how to do compressions in the water

When was that, and which agency?

 

[Storker]

I also distinctly remember being taught how to do compressions in the water

That sounds really weird. It's virtually impossible to do proper chest compressions unless the victim is lying on a hard surface. In the water, I'd say it's completely impossible.

 

[txaggie08]

That sounds really weird. It's virtually impossible to do proper chest compressions unless the victim is lying on a hard surface. In the water, I'd say it's completely impossible.

I didnt say anything about "effective". Especially as a first responder, there was nothing effective about that, and it was a massive time waster. You can pull off some degree of compression in water, but it is an exercise in futility. So was the argument over hose lengths not being "standard", and if the stupid snorkel was positioned correctly.

PADI, and 6 years ago now I believe.

 

[rongoodman]

I also distinctly remember being taught how to do compressions in the water, and nearly drowning my "volunteer". Many, many others remember that as well...

That makes no sense at all. You can't do effective chest compressions on a bed, let alone in the water.