It was with a certain amount of sadness that I read a letter of the same title a few weeks ago. It was the week before DEMA and my first reaction was that it was just another ill-advised marketing ploy. I even posted as much and took a bit of heat, mostly from friends, who thought I was wrong. That's OK, I've been wrong before, but something didn't feel right about this and it still doesn’t. Maybe it was just the timing, or the conflicting “facts”, in any event, I felt compelled to research this a lot more which included a short discussion with Al Hornsby of PADI as well as emails from David Concannon. I wanted answers and even more: I wanted to know if I was right.
If you're hoping for a letter condemning parties or even agencies, well this ain't it. It's my humble opinion that there are very few evil people in this world. We all make our share of mistakes and most often those mistakes are fairly innocent. Yes, they can be and are used by our critics and competitors to paint us as being evil, but that’s just not the case. I don't believe those critics and competitors are evil either. They might be a bit opportunistic and that only means that even they can make mistakes. I don't buy into the mantra that states “If I don't sell, teach or dive it, then it must be crap.” The agencies, and the people who make them up are genuinely trying to make their agency the best. Some do a better job than others, but in the end we are all on the same team.
First, let me state unequivocally that the only tragedy is that a boy lost his life. The tragedy is compounded by the facts that diving is optional, the boy probably had no business being in the water with his recent illness and he was ultimately abandoned when he needed help most. This whole idea of PADI throwing the instructor under the bus is absurd, and that some see that as some sort of tragedy only makes it doubly so. The instructor is breathing: the Boy Scout is not. Let's keep our priorities intact here.
Second, here is the time line I've been able to suss out as best I can:
Fact: The instructor broke standards for a PADI DSD. Not just one, but a number of standards were violated. Providing an incomplete confined water session, including not doing a proper buoyancy check, leaving the kids at depth and ignoring the horrible visibility are the three obvious ones. PADI has zero tolerance when it comes to death/major injuries and breaking standards. I think this is wise and they are very reticent to consider any mitigating circumstances. The instructor was expelled for these very reasons and he was told about it. There was no double secret probation going on here. Yeah, it makes great controversy when you want to bash an agency, but the truth makes far more sense.
Fact: The instructor was expelled long before any litigation was initiated. It wasn't done to cover PADI's butt, but rather to keep the instructor from possibly hurting anyone else. This was a prudent action and should be lauded by the entire dive community, including Brian Carney. Stopping an unsafe instructor is what Quality Assurance is all about. It’s my opinion that expelling the instructor actually increased PADI’s liability.
Fact: This kid was given 30 pounds of weight for a five mil farmer john suit and a steel tank. Most cold water instructors I have talked to believe this to be at least 10 pounds over weighted. For a participant without adequate training to inflate a BCD, this was an obvious contributing factor. It's why we don't abandon DSD students in Open Water.
Fact: The Incident Report was accidentally given to the opposing attorneys. What hasn't been revealed is that PADI attorneys had always refused to give this up as a work product, and the local attorneys are the ones who made the mistake. There was no intent to throw the instructor “under the bus”, and PADI has ample proof of that. However, once the mistake was discovered, a claw back motion was initiated to prevent the document from being used as evidence. In other words, it can't be used in the current litigation. A mistake was made and then made right.
Fact: The Sheriff's report is far more damning than the incident report. The opposing counsel has no need for the incident report, since the Sheriff did his job and got the facts right at the accident scene before mitigating legal risk was a factor. There are some conclusions drawn by the sheriff that are apparently being contested, but the report had all the details of the Incident report and a few more.
Fact: PADI’s attorneys and the plaintiffs’ attorneys were fined only for delaying their disclosure of the settlement, not for an improper settlement which was approved by the judge. Why did PADI settle? How can you defend yourself when you've expelled your instructor for his violating your own standards? Plus, PADI was sued for “agency” (ie that the instructor and dive store were agents of PADI), meaning that PADI could have been found liable for their actions, without having done anything wrong itself. They reduced their legal liability by settling a law suit they had an unacceptable risk of losing. PADI is now staying in the case to be sure that they are not misrepresented by a frantic attempt to throw them under the bus. There is nothing illegal or unethical about this. Not in the least. I can see how the opposing attorney finds this frustrating. Moreover, I have yet to see any evidence that PADI colluded with the family in any way.
So what are we to make of Brian Carney's letter? Is it a simple mistake of being fed errant facts? Is it a ploy of the second largest agency trying to gain market share on the largest? It’s certainly getting enough play on the web, at DEMA and in the recertification notices to certainly seem to be the case. In reality, only Brian can answer that question, and no matter what he says, we are free to draw our own conclusions. I'm hoping that it was nothing more than an ill-timed, simple mistake. It's why I'll continue to be an SDI/TDI instructor.
As a caveat, I feel it's always bad form to bash a competitor. As a TDI/SDI and NASE instructor, I feel that commenting negatively on any other agency or instructor is simply bashing. I won't do it, and I feel that Brian should have refrained from making his comments if for only this reason. To be sure, I'm not a PADI instructor, though they do advertise on ScubaBoard. PADI never asked me to write this, but I felt compelled to find out the facts and then tell the world. In that regard, SDI has advertised with us in the past, and I am certain that this letter may keep them from coming back. That’s OK, to me, it's all about fairness. I hate to see agency bashing and even more so when it's from the CEO of my chosen agency.
If you're hoping for a letter condemning parties or even agencies, well this ain't it. It's my humble opinion that there are very few evil people in this world. We all make our share of mistakes and most often those mistakes are fairly innocent. Yes, they can be and are used by our critics and competitors to paint us as being evil, but that’s just not the case. I don't believe those critics and competitors are evil either. They might be a bit opportunistic and that only means that even they can make mistakes. I don't buy into the mantra that states “If I don't sell, teach or dive it, then it must be crap.” The agencies, and the people who make them up are genuinely trying to make their agency the best. Some do a better job than others, but in the end we are all on the same team.
First, let me state unequivocally that the only tragedy is that a boy lost his life. The tragedy is compounded by the facts that diving is optional, the boy probably had no business being in the water with his recent illness and he was ultimately abandoned when he needed help most. This whole idea of PADI throwing the instructor under the bus is absurd, and that some see that as some sort of tragedy only makes it doubly so. The instructor is breathing: the Boy Scout is not. Let's keep our priorities intact here.
Second, here is the time line I've been able to suss out as best I can:
- Boy is sick.
- Boy decides to do DSD with Troop Pals in spite of this.
- Parent completes release forms including Medical Release.
- Medical Release reviewed and signed by Physician Assistant, not Physician.
- No pool session is done.
- The 120 pound boy had been given weight of 30 pounds for a five mil suit and steel cylinder.
- At fifteen feet deep, an adult swims to the surface.
- Instructor follows, leaving two on the bottom.
- The Boy succumbs.
- Search is initiated and the boy's body is found 45 to 55 minutes later by a helper at the Camp, Mr. Jones.
- Mr. Jones cannot lift body without removing weight belt and gear.
- Sheriff shows up and takes statements from instructor and all survivors.
- Within days, the incident report is filled out and turned in by instructor.
- PADI expels instructor based on incident report within two weeks.
- Instructor is advised verbally by PADI QA of specific violations. Standardized letter is sent in order to protect instructor in case of a law suit.
- A year later, parents initiate law suit against instructor, PADI, Boy Scouts and dive shop.
- Instructor’s attorney makes claim against PADI on behalf of instructor and dive shop.
- PADI settles what is to them, a non-winnable case.
- PADI remains in the case to defend its Discover Scuba Diving program so it won't be thrown under the bus.
- Brian Carney writes letter one week prior to DEMA condemning PADI for being prudent.
- Instructor's/dive store’s lawyer discusses the case openly on ScubaBoard.com.
Fact: The instructor broke standards for a PADI DSD. Not just one, but a number of standards were violated. Providing an incomplete confined water session, including not doing a proper buoyancy check, leaving the kids at depth and ignoring the horrible visibility are the three obvious ones. PADI has zero tolerance when it comes to death/major injuries and breaking standards. I think this is wise and they are very reticent to consider any mitigating circumstances. The instructor was expelled for these very reasons and he was told about it. There was no double secret probation going on here. Yeah, it makes great controversy when you want to bash an agency, but the truth makes far more sense.
Fact: The instructor was expelled long before any litigation was initiated. It wasn't done to cover PADI's butt, but rather to keep the instructor from possibly hurting anyone else. This was a prudent action and should be lauded by the entire dive community, including Brian Carney. Stopping an unsafe instructor is what Quality Assurance is all about. It’s my opinion that expelling the instructor actually increased PADI’s liability.
Fact: This kid was given 30 pounds of weight for a five mil farmer john suit and a steel tank. Most cold water instructors I have talked to believe this to be at least 10 pounds over weighted. For a participant without adequate training to inflate a BCD, this was an obvious contributing factor. It's why we don't abandon DSD students in Open Water.
Fact: The Incident Report was accidentally given to the opposing attorneys. What hasn't been revealed is that PADI attorneys had always refused to give this up as a work product, and the local attorneys are the ones who made the mistake. There was no intent to throw the instructor “under the bus”, and PADI has ample proof of that. However, once the mistake was discovered, a claw back motion was initiated to prevent the document from being used as evidence. In other words, it can't be used in the current litigation. A mistake was made and then made right.
Fact: The Sheriff's report is far more damning than the incident report. The opposing counsel has no need for the incident report, since the Sheriff did his job and got the facts right at the accident scene before mitigating legal risk was a factor. There are some conclusions drawn by the sheriff that are apparently being contested, but the report had all the details of the Incident report and a few more.
Fact: PADI’s attorneys and the plaintiffs’ attorneys were fined only for delaying their disclosure of the settlement, not for an improper settlement which was approved by the judge. Why did PADI settle? How can you defend yourself when you've expelled your instructor for his violating your own standards? Plus, PADI was sued for “agency” (ie that the instructor and dive store were agents of PADI), meaning that PADI could have been found liable for their actions, without having done anything wrong itself. They reduced their legal liability by settling a law suit they had an unacceptable risk of losing. PADI is now staying in the case to be sure that they are not misrepresented by a frantic attempt to throw them under the bus. There is nothing illegal or unethical about this. Not in the least. I can see how the opposing attorney finds this frustrating. Moreover, I have yet to see any evidence that PADI colluded with the family in any way.
So what are we to make of Brian Carney's letter? Is it a simple mistake of being fed errant facts? Is it a ploy of the second largest agency trying to gain market share on the largest? It’s certainly getting enough play on the web, at DEMA and in the recertification notices to certainly seem to be the case. In reality, only Brian can answer that question, and no matter what he says, we are free to draw our own conclusions. I'm hoping that it was nothing more than an ill-timed, simple mistake. It's why I'll continue to be an SDI/TDI instructor.
As a caveat, I feel it's always bad form to bash a competitor. As a TDI/SDI and NASE instructor, I feel that commenting negatively on any other agency or instructor is simply bashing. I won't do it, and I feel that Brian should have refrained from making his comments if for only this reason. To be sure, I'm not a PADI instructor, though they do advertise on ScubaBoard. PADI never asked me to write this, but I felt compelled to find out the facts and then tell the world. In that regard, SDI has advertised with us in the past, and I am certain that this letter may keep them from coming back. That’s OK, to me, it's all about fairness. I hate to see agency bashing and even more so when it's from the CEO of my chosen agency.
Last edited:
