(5/01/05) Diver missing in Florida

[pilot fish]

Island Dog,

Thanks for the calm, collected, non-accusory post. I haven't been following this post but I'm amazed how it's diverged AND, more importantly, the recent shouda/couda/wouda analysis (particularly from VERY experienced instructors/divemasters).

Again, we should all take what we want from this incident. Implying or assigning blame isn't one of them. Some suggestions:

For Web Monkey, never go on a dive boat with strangers (???).
For KrisB, never go on a dive boat without a rescue diver/captain.
For Tom Winters, uhhh... lecture the captain on his responsibilities (jump in the water, leave the other divers,...)???

For the rest of us, inflate your BC on surfacing, carry a SMB, jon line (maybe), don't leave your buddies or signal ok when you're not, .... feel free to add more.

As Andy asked, where did Island Dog get that info? If true it sheds additional light on the incident but still tells of nothing about what really occured. If it was a sixpak boat, thought it was larger?, could it have been easier to move that boat towards him?

 

[KrisB]

For KrisB, never go on a dive boat without a rescue diver/captain.

Hmm. That's good advice for anyone. If you're on a commercial dive boat, there had better darn well be a captain to go with it!

 

[ParamedicDiver1]

What is a Good Samaritan Statute?
Good Samaritan statutes are laws enacted by the various states that protect healthcare providers and other rescuers from being sued when they are giving emergency help to a victim provided the person uses reasonable, prudent guidelines for care using the resources they have available at the time of the accident. Most states have enacted some form of Good Samaritan or Volunteer Protection law prohibiting a victim from suing a physician or other health care professional for injuries from a Good Samaritan act.

To trigger the protection of such an act, several conditions must be satisfied: it must be a volunteer act, the person receiving the help must not object to being helped, and the actions of the rescuer must be a good-faith effort to help. People are rarely sued for helping in an emergency, but the existence of Good Samaritan Laws does not mean that some one cannot sue. Good Samaritan Laws do not provide absolute protection from malpractice claims. Each state has guidelines for professionals.

A professional should not leave a patient unless care is transferred to an equally competent professional. This might mean a trip to the ER in some cases. Always activate emergency medical services as soon as possible so that you can leave the person in hands of competent rescue personnel.

Negligence and gross misconduct are not defensible! Some states have enacted laws that make it a punishable offense NOT to render aid... There are many factors to be considered about responding as a Good Samaritan as a health care professional... can I be sued? What happens when a Good Samaritan suffers injuries or damage to his or her property as a result of responding to a call for help? Do Good Samaritan Laws protect me if I respond to help in cases of terrorist bombings or similar large-scale disasters? While each state's statutes differ, the basic principles are similar-

"Any person who, in good faith, renders emergency medical care or assistance to an injured person at the scene of an accident or other emergency without the expectation of receiving or intending to receive compensation from such injured person for such service, shall not be liable in civil damages for any act or omission, not constituting gross negligence, in the course of such care or assistance."

 

[KrisB]

yup.

So, if an individual acts too far outside their training (e.g. if I gave a patient a tracheotomy) they can be held liable. However, if they make a good-faith effort to provide assistance, then they are protected.

Also, in many cases it's not limited to medical professionals, but to anyone who may have some sort of ability to help.

Keep in mind the legal landscape in Canada is a little different -- up here it's rare to get sued at all for that sort of issue, unless a criminal trial has found you guilty already. Up here, there's a handy little thing called "loser pays" which prevents most people from bringing frivolous or "just maybe" lawsuits, as they will be held in judgement for the legal costs of the other party if they lose.

 

[DiveGolfSki]

...but still tells of nothing about what really occured.

So what? No one is going to get access to a full fledged accident report unless you're family (or a lawyer for the family). Even if one could get the report, I doubt if it will be able to assign fault. Besides what do you gain in finding out what "really" occured (aside from assigning blame or fault). Remember the rules:

The purpose of this forum is the promotion of safe diving through accident analysis.
Accurate analysis of accidents and incidents that could easily have become accidents is essential to building lessons learned from which improved safety can flow. To foster the free exchange of information valuable to this process, the "manners" in this forum are much more tightly controlled than elsewhere on the board. In addition to the TOS:

(1) Events will be "scrubbed" of names. You may refer to articles or news releases already in the public domain, but the only name you may use in this forum is your own.
(2) No "blamestorming." Accident analysis does not "find fault" - it finds hazards - and how to reduce or eliminate them.(3) No flaming, name calling or otherwise attacking other posters. You may attack ideas; you may not attack people.
(4) No trolling.
(5) Remember that you cannot read minds. Restrict comments to what happened and how to prevent it, without speculating on what someone else was thinking (or not). The only thoughts you are qualified to share are your own.

While we may never get enough information to make an "accurate analysis of accidents and incidents" you can build lessons learned (I'm paraphrasing here).

 

[ParamedicDiver1]

However, there is a often a legal obligation for those trained in rescue to perform it. For instance, if I was trained in some sort of First Aid (or First Responder), even if it is just Rescue Diver, and drive by an unattended accident scene on the highway without stopping, that can be considered a criminal act here (unless I can prove there was a threat to my own safety).

In order to have a case of negligence, 4 things MUST be present:

1) Duty to Act, 2) Breach of the duty, 3) Causation, and 4) Damage (Injury).

Just being trained in First Aid or Rescue diving does not fulfill the requirements of Duty to Act.

 

[KrisB]

In order to have a case of negligence, 4 things MUST be present:

1) Duty to Act, 2) Breach of the duty, 3) Causation, and 4) Damage (Injury).

Just being trained in First Aid or Rescue diving does not fulfill the requirements of Duty to Act.

Not the case here. If you are trained in first aid and fail to act despite there being no other assistance around, you can be held liable. I think the rationale for it falls this way:

1. as a trained first responder (and human), you have a duty to act to save another human's life
2. by not responding, you breach that duty
3. this *caused* the patient to be delayed care
4. the damage could range from delayed recovery right up to death.

And I know you're thinking it -- "Canada, the next communist state" -- and you're probably right, given the political trends up here.

 

[DiveGolfSki]

Hmm. That's good advice for anyone. If you're on a commercial dive boat, there had better darn well be a captain to go with it!

I think there was in this case. I'm just not sure if he had "rescue diver" qualifications. Besides, there were five people on the boat (note to Pilot: here's a link to the operator and boat http://www.itsadive.com/Dive_Boats.htm from an earlier post ... it's the N2Deep): the captain, the victim and three other divers. So, if the four divers go down, leaving the captain topside. One diver surfaces on #3 buoy indicating distress does the lone captain:

1. galantly jump in the water to save the "diver in distress" by inflating the diver's BC/dropping his weights/swimming/dragging the diver 100ft against a mild current back on the boat ... as some have suggested.

2. throw a line 100ft away to the victim and expect him to, what, clip on? pull on the line?

3. or according to GPatton's indicident report "I THEN SPOKE WITH THE BOAT CAPTAIN WITNESS J WHO STATED, HE HAD SEEN THE VICTIM SURFACE AND APPROXIMATELY 2:50 PM HOURS ONE MOORING BALL AWAY AND SIGNAL HE WAS IN DISTRESS. WITNESS J. FURTHER STATED, HE ADVISED THE VICTIM TO STAY PUT UNTIL THE OTHER DIVERS WERE ON THE BOAT. ACCORDING TO THE WITNESS J., THE CURRENT BEGAN TO PICK UP AND THE VICTIM TURNED LOOSE OF THE MOORING BALL. WITNESS J. STATED, THE VICTIM BEGAN TO TRY TO SWIM FOR THE BOAT BUT THEN WENT UNDER WATER. WITNESS J. STATED, HE THEN LEFT HIS MOORING TO GO HELPED THE VICTIM AND COULD NOT LOCATE HIM. WITNESS J. STATED, IT IS WHEN HE CONTACTED THE COAST GUARD BY RADIO AND CELL PHONE, AND APPROXIMATELY 2:55 PM

The victim is noticed at 2:50, the captain (witness J) left his mooring between 2:50 and 2:55 when he contacted the coast guard.

Until I read otherwise (again if the entire incident/accident report is ever published), the captain seems to have done as much as he could (good samaritan or otherwise).

On closing, the dive operator already posted a preliminary statement indicating that the captain was/is upset/traumatized by this entire incident. Second guessing (the infamous shouda/couda/wouda analysis) SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THIS FORUM.

 

[KrisB]

Second guessing (the infamous shouda/couda/wouda analysis) SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THIS FORUM.

Thus spake cmgmg.

Read your own post for the forum rules (http://www.scubaboard.com/showpost.php?p=1077594&postcount=235). There is no prohibition on your "shouda couda wouda analysis".

Please, stop trying to act like everyone's nanny. If the contributions I make are within the scope of the forum rules, there really is no reason to attack what I am saying.

Oh, and if it takes a "rescue diver" cert to attempt a surface rescue, then we're in more trouble than we think! There are many who are trained to a greater degree than just "rescue diver" who can do it better, yet have never donned scuba gear.

 

[DiveGolfSki]

Thus spake cmgmg.

Read your own post for the forum rules (http://www.scubaboard.com/showpost.php?p=1077594&postcount=235). There is no prohibition on your "shouda couda wouda analysis".

Please, stop trying to act like everyone's nanny. If the contributions I make are within the scope of the forum rules, there really is no reason to attack what I am saying.

Oh, and if it takes a "rescue diver" cert to attempt a surface rescue, then we're in more trouble than we think! There are many who are trained to a greater degree than just "rescue diver" who can do it better, yet have never donned scuba gear.

When did I attack what you're saying? :11: Didn't I agree with your point about close buddy contact. I also happen to agree with your point about having a condolence forum.

As far as the "shouda couda wouda analysis" point, I took the liberty of pointing out there seemed to a lot of it going around particularly as it relates to the captain or other "people" on board. Granted you weren't one of them and I apologize if you took it the wrong way.

BTW, when someone says the captain should have jumped in the water somehow implies that he is to blame. I know it wasn't you.

As far as the "nanny point", read the rules as far as name calling. It is uncalled for but, since you are not even 25 yet ... maybe you do need a nanny.