A compassionate instructor

[MXGratefulDiver]

That may be the perspective of the father, but it is not reality. The Instructor is the one responsible. He is required by law to act in a responsible manner (standard-of-care). In the case of an accident, the father could have sued the instructor, the dive shop and perhaps the pool. Expert witnesses from the diving agency would crucify the Instructor in court. That is the reality.


Yes, I certainly think it's one of them.

... but from your first paragraph, liability appears to be all of your objection.

OK ... that's a valid concern. So why are so many in this thread bringing up the safety issue? Quite honestly, that kid's probably safer with his dad than with most dive instructors.

As an instructor, I understand the liability aspect. From a diver perspective, I am also very much in favor of personal responsibility. From the perspective of a father teaching his son about responsibility, scuba diving seems to me a great way to do so ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Kingpatzer]

Ok, let's grant that the instructor opened up himself to liability, and let's presume for a moment it is his shop (I'm not sure if that's come out in the discussion or not).

Can we assume for a moment that he knew that?

At that point, what's the objection? It is his pocket book and business that is at risk. It is his choice to put them at risk.

If it is not his shop, then objection to his actions should be that he may have exceeded his authority to expose the shop to liability.

 

[DCBC]

... but from your first paragraph, liability appears to be all of your objection.

...As an instructor, I understand the liability aspect. From a diver perspective, I am also very much in favor of personal responsibility. From the perspective of a father teaching his son about responsibility, scuba diving seems to me a great way to do so.

Actually it's not my only objection Bob. I see the actions taken by the Instructor as irresponsible. He has breached his agreement with the certification agency (which I may be a member of). Irresponsible Instructors give us all a bad name and quite likely such irresponsibility is seldom confined to one event.

If a father (non-certified instructor) wishes to teach diving to his son, he can fill his boots. If it involves one of the certification agencies and a on-going course; I don't believe that exceptions to the rules can be made. As you know there are some areas where an Instructor has some discretion, but this isn't one of them.

As a diving professional, I find it reasonable that Instructors maintain a level of professionalism and respect the standards set-down by the certification organizations they represent.

 

[Paladin]

Spoken like a true bureaucrat.

 

[I Dive]

Actually it's not my only objection Bob. I see the actions taken by the Instructor as irresponsible. He has breached his agreement with the certification agency (which I may be a member of). Irresponsible Instructors give us all a bad name and quite likely such irresponsibility is seldom confined to one event.

If a father (non-certified instructor) wishes to teach diving to his son, he can fill his boots. If it involves one of the certification agencies and a on-going course; I don't believe that exceptions to the rules can be made. As you know there are some areas where an Instructor has some discretion, but this isn't one of them.

As a diving professional, I find it reasonable that Instructors maintain a level of professionalism and respect the standards set-down by the certification organizations they represent.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :wave:

People want to say that agency standards have been reduced, dumbed down, or whatever and that is resulting in poorer quality divers today than in years past. I submit that Instructors doing whatever the Hell they want, following whichever standards are convenient for them and disregarding whichever are not, and in general just having an incredibly poor attitude towards the agency they choose to represent is far more at fault for a poor quality of diver than any agency standards. This thread has gone a long with in proving that theory for me. If I ever hear of a certifying agency starting a practice of expelling members for having crappy attitudes, poorly representing that agency, and in general just being an embarassment I will likely cross over to that agency in a matter of days... I don't know what agency you are with, DCBC, but they should be proud to have you in their ranks.

 

[Thalassamania]

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People want to say that agency standards have been reduced, dumbed down, or whatever and that is resulting in poorer quality divers today than in years past. I submit that Instructors doing whatever the Hell they want, following whichever standards are convenient for them and disregarding whichever are not, and in general just having an incredibly poor attitude towards the agency they choose to represent is far more at fault for a poor quality of diver than any agency standards. This thread has gone a long with in proving that theory for me. If I ever hear of a certifying agency starting a practice of expelling members for having crappy attitudes, poorly representing that agency, and in general just being an embarassment I will likely cross over to that agency in a matter of days... I don't know what agency you are with, DCBC, but they should be proud to have you in their ranks.

The fallacy in what you're preaching is in the assumption that without agency standards instructors are, "doing whatever the Hell they want, following whichever standards are convenient for them and disregarding whichever are not ..." This I think is quite incorrect. Despite my being recruited (because of my specific expertise) to produce a full revision of NAUI's standards, from top to bottom, throughout my career I have been bound not by standards but by the monthly review of my actions and decisions by a group of experts (a university Diving Control Board - DCB) and I never injured or killed anyone, nor have any of my appointees.

Those individuals whom I select to teach others to dive, have no certification by any agency, they are approved, after the fact, by the DCB and a university Vice President/Provost. But I select them, I train them, I evaluate them, I decide to invite them back to the next class and when required, I discipline them and remove them from teaching situations.

Similarly, I approve certain divers to dive with less qualified divers, in the role of a mentor, Diving Supervisor or Specialty Instructor; again, there is no "agency" involved. That's where I'm coming from. I am able to do this (and people like me have been doing this since 1952 with a virtually perfect safety record) because I am an expert. The bottom line of being an expert is that he or she, "no longer needs to rely on rules, guidelines or maxims and posses an authoritative knowledge of the disciplines that make up diving that leads to a deep tacit understanding of, as well as a holistic and intuitive grasp of situations." Thus the odds are that the judgments an expert makes are spot on, even when they run counter to rules, guidelines or maxims that are needed to keep risks at an acceptable level for the Proficient or merely Competent Instructors who make up most of the population.

Now let's go back to my first post in this thread:

Let's consider an alternative view. The instructor is, in fact, an expert. He's been around long enough to be an effective judge of a Paladin954's knowledge, skill and capability. Paladin954 is an old time diver and, though not as active as he once was, has lost (or forgotten) very little. The Instructor knows him, has seen him, has talked with him and is perfectly comfortable with the level of risk.

Frankly, I suspect that given the alternative between sending my kid out for a pool dive with Paladin954 or a most newly certified Instructors, I suspect that I'd pick Paladin954.

If you're still confused, here are the definitions that I use as a basis.

 

[dwhthediver]

The fallacy in what you're preaching is in the assumption that without agency standards instructors are, "doing whatever the Hell they want, following whichever standards are convenient for them and disregarding whichever are not ..." This I think is quite incorrect. Despite my being recruited (because of my specific expertise) to produce a full revision of NAUI's standards, from top to bottom, throughout my career I have been bound not by standards but by the monthly review of my actions and decisions by a group of experts (a university Diving Control Board - DCB) and I never injured or killed anyone, nor have any of my appointees.

Those individuals whom I select to teach others to dive, have no certification by any agency, they are approved, after the fact, by the DCB and a university Vice President/Provost. But I select them, I train them, I evaluate them, I decide to invite them back to the next class and when required, I discipline them and remove them from teaching situations.

Similarly, I approve certain divers to dive with less qualified divers, in the role of a mentor, Diving Supervisor or Specialty Instructor; again, there is no "agency" involved. That's where I'm coming from. I am able to do this (and people like me have been doing this since 1952 with a virtually perfect safety record) because I am an expert. The bottom line of being an expert is that he or she, "no longer needs to rely on rules, guidelines or maxims and posses an authoritative knowledge of the disciplines that make up diving that leads to a deep tacit understanding of, as well as a holistic and intuitive grasp of situations." Thus the odds are that the judgments an expert makes are spot on, even when they run counter to rules, guidelines or maxims that are needed to keep risks at an acceptable level for the Proficient or merely Competent Instructors who make up most of the population.

Now let's go back to my first post in this thread:


If you're still confused, here are the definitions that I use as a basis.

That's fine, IN the situation you describe YOU decide and become the certifying agency In the situation the OP laid out, the instructor HAS agreed to the authority of the agency that gave him the credentials to teach, and submit to their standards, and I am not going to get into the differences between agencies, but I doubt that anyone of them allow an instructor to hand SCUBA gear to a non certified diver and let a person not set in a supervisory role with their agency take them in the pool or wherever. The proper way to have done this, is either before the class, or after the class the INSTRUCTOR take the kid under and be with him while he tried SCUBA. NOTHING CONFUSING ABOUT IT

 

[Zieg]

So, I would like for every instructor involved in this thread to please quote and reference the different trainging agencies (whichever one you may be associated with) requlations pertaining to this situation. Many have stated that the instructor involved broke the authority/standards/rules that whatever agency established.

Specificly I would like to see the what the training agencies have established about loaning equipment to another diver, allowing a non-certified diver into a pool that a class is utilizing, and I guess allowing a non-certified diver to enter any water.

So please don't tell me what you think the rules are, please reference and quote these rules. I would like to know specifically what you believe the instructor is quilty of.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

So, I would like for every instructor involved in this thread to please quote and reference the different trainging agencies (whichever one you may be associated with) requlations pertaining to this situation. Many have stated that the instructor involved broke the authority/standards/rules that whatever agency established.

Specificly I would like to see the what the training agencies have established about loaning equipment to another diver, allowing a non-certified diver into a pool that a class is utilizing, and I guess allowing a non-certified diver to enter any water.

So please don't tell me what you think the rules are, please reference and quote these rules. I would like to know specifically what you believe the instructor is quilty of.

Perhaps it's worth pointing out that at no point in this discussion has it been mentioned which agency the instructor was working for.

Might that not be relevent to what standards were broken ... or not?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[I Dive]

So, I would like for every instructor involved in this thread to please quote and reference the different trainging agencies (whichever one you may be associated with) requlations pertaining to this situation. Many have stated that the instructor involved broke the authority/standards/rules that whatever agency established.

Specificly I would like to see the what the training agencies have established about loaning equipment to another diver, allowing a non-certified diver into a pool that a class is utilizing, and I guess allowing a non-certified diver to enter any water.

So please don't tell me what you think the rules are, please reference and quote these rules. I would like to know specifically what you believe the instructor is quilty of.

I don't know what agency this Instructor was with, but PADI requires close supervision of a DSD. There is actually a question regarding proximity to the PADI pro on the DSD knowledge and safety review. I'd post the actual question but I don't feel that is professional. Like I said, I don't know what agency this Instructor is with, but can anyone list for me an agency that does not require close supervision for a DSD?