13 year old diver dies - Oahu, Hawaii

[Colliam7]

If it is not the case why are we having this discussion?

Because someone died. That's the entire point. Anytime someone dies unexpectedly doing something that is perceived to be 'safe', there is an understandable aftermath reaction. It is not expected that someone should die while participating in a DSD Open water dive. That doesn't mean it is impossible, only that it is unlikely.

Scuba diving is not risk-free. DSDs are not risk-free. They may be (in fact, are) incredibly low in risk. But, someone died, and we ignore the fact that tens of thousands had a safe and good experience, and focus on the isolated death.

Perhaps, part of the challenge is terminology. Frank alluded to this in his comment (post #134 ) that I excerpted. We should not 'sell' tourists on the idea that DSDs are 'safe', because that may suggest that participants are 'protected from or not exposed to danger or risk', according to one dictionary definition of 'safe'. In that context neither DSDs, or diving in general, are 'safe'. There is risk - of equipment failure, critter encounters, diver panic, poor instructor performance, etc. But, the other part of the same dictionary definition is that a person doing the activity is 'not likely to be harmed or lost'. And, that part is true - someone participating in a DSD is not likely to be harmed or lost. That doesn't mean it is not possible to be harmed or lost, only that it is improbable. Tens of thousands of DSD Open Water dives are conducted without incident each year, and those dives form a denominator so large that even a numerator of 5 deaths, if they were to occur, constitute the numerical reality of not likely.

I acknowledge that others may choose to use different wording than I employ. Some may choose to perceive DSDs as 'an accident waiting to happen'. If so, then scuba diving overall is 'an accident waiting to happen'. Open Water dive training is 'an accident waiting to happen'. Driving an automobile is 'an accident waiting to happen'. Flying on a commercial airliner is 'an accident waiting to happen'. All of those activities are associated with unexpected deaths every year - quite a few of them, in fact, but the numerators, while absolutely notable, pale in comparison to the denominators.

Sooner or later someone pays with their life, but the death toll not big enough consider any change.

Yes, that is a fair statement, because a) there is some risk, irrespective of how low, and b) it is hard to implement meaningful change. To circle back, once again, to my original point in this discussion: It is beguilingly easy to implement change, which will have no impact on the problem itself, but will have unnecessary impact on many others. Meaningful change is more difficult, and costly. In this case, we are focused on the DSD ratios for the Open Water dive, although we actually do not know that whatever ratio was in place had anything to do with the death of the young man. A far more probable cause was poor dive professional judgement. We want to believe that changing ratios will somehow constrain the boundaries of judgement sufficiently to prevent the consequences of poor judgement. That outcome is far more unlikely than the probability of harm or injury occurring while diving. Sad but true. A meaningful change would be a fundamental change in the training requirements for certification as a dive professional. A meaningful change would be implementation of a requirement for periodic re-assessment and re-certification of dive professionals. But, the expense and inconvenience of those actions (to all, not just those exercising poor judgement), in a recreational activity which is already relatively quite safe, is not considered acceptable. Changing ratios is easy, and will do nothing to address the probable real issue. As Frank said:

It’s about the attitude with which it approached, not the rules governing it. Rules just keep the folks who dive safe anyways safe. For the unsafe, no amount of rules or ratios will help.

You not doing DSDs because the risk is not acceptable indicates to me that you believe that it is an accident waiting to happen.

Nope. I don't do the Open Water DSD dives because I do not have access to an environment in which I feel comfortable that I am good enough to do them at a level of risk that - for me - is acceptable. If I lived next to the ocean site I described, above, I would do them, enthusiastically. My decision to not do Open Water DSD dives is a statement about me and my abilities, and my available resources, not about DSDs. I do Confined Water DSDs regularly, and have never had an incident.