Any PADI instructors here who are also DIR compliant?

[DCBC]

I asked this question earlier in the thread, but I'm going to ask it again: It's my understanding that you cannot refuse to ceritify someone as a PADI diver because they don't meet your own (additional) standards, providing they have met the PADI standards. True or false? IE if the diver then complained to PADI HQ about not receiving certification, having 'demonstrated mastery' of the required skills, passed the exams etc, where would the instructor stand?

Likely in breach of PADI Standards for deviating from the PADI Program...

 

[DevonDiver]

Also, every module allows for underwater swimming, practice and exploring. This is a great time to work on neutral buoyancy,..

But if standards specifically stated that skills cannot be "conducted" out-of-order (sequencing modules), and buoyancy skills were listed in that sequence; how would you work on buoyancy skills prior to their introduction at the designated and proper sequenced point in training?

Hypothetical scenario: You have a student practicing hover during 'free time' at the end of CW#1. That student is practicing buoyancy and loses control, rises to surface whilst holding their breath. They die.

A lawyer stands up in court... "Instructor 'A' was negligent and breaching their own agencies standards. Those standards state unequivocally that neutral buoyancy should not be conducted until 2 further sessions had occurred. The instructor had not yet formally conducted the LPI inflate/deflate skill with the student - a skill not conducted, as per standards, until the following session. Confirmed possession...'mastery' of that skill...prior to neutral buoyancy practice, is likely to have avoided this tragic accident altogether. It is the instructor's professional negligence to have encouraged the student into neutral buoyancy when they have neither learned, nor demonstrated mastery of, the sub-set skills that contribute to safe and effective buoyancy control."

PADI representative stands up in court... "Our standards are listed in the Instructor Manual and following those standards is a condition of professional membership..."

 

[Peter Guy]

Quick question -- how many of you posters who are discussing what "the Court" or "the lawyers" will do have:

a. Gone to law school?

b. Taken the Bar exam?

c. Tried a case?

d. Know the laws of ALL the jurisdictions in which a PADI class is taught?

IF the answer to most of these questions is -- Not me -- then why, pray tell, should any of us give your opinions any credit on the legal issues of liability?

For the record -- I can answer "yes" to all but the last question and I ALWAYS make a statement that my comments about legal issues are either "in general in common law jurisdictions" or "in Washington." Also, for the record, PADI is not my insurer and has no legal responsibility to defend me if I am sued for "scuba instruction malpractice." My insurance carrier DOES have a legal responsibility to defend me if I am sued and IF my insurance carrier decided NOT to defend me, I would have a wonderful claim against it. Anyone want to bet on whether a jury would support me or the insurance company in such a claim?

Back to a question I thought DD had answered -- DD, is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is part of the PADI standards? Or is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is a "suggestion" and NOT part of the standards?

 

[DCBC]

For the record -- I can answer "yes" to all but the last question

Peter, are you saying that a Lawyer has any better idea what a Judge thinks than anyone else sitting in the Courtroom? The last time I checked, mind reading wasn't part of any Law School's training syllabus... You might know what he is likely to do, but there's no guarantee.

A Lawyer makes the best argument he can (hopefully supported by case law, ideally from a higher Court of Jurisdiction), then sits and waits for the decision. What does going to law school, taking a Bar exam, or having tried a case have to do with it?

You don't need to know "ALL the jurisdictions in which a PADI class is taught?" Just the one in-which the case is tried.

My insurance carrier DOES have a legal responsibility to defend me if I am sued and IF my insurance carrier decided NOT to defend me, I would have a wonderful claim against it.

Would you? I don't know. Do not insurance policies stipulate within the fine print that coverage is contingent on teaching within the confines of the training agency? Do you think that you can do anything and the insurance will cover you? What are the limitations?

Peter, you should know better than most how insurance companies work. There are specific provisions within policies, which exclude coverage. Perhaps you should talk with some of the folks in New Orleans, or more recently Calgary. Because you have insurance, doesn't mean they will pay any claim... Anyway you look at it, if a threat of litigation exists, I'd rather be on the side of Standards (proven in-writing) than not...

 

[danvolker]

Quick question -- how many of you posters who are discussing what "the Court" or "the lawyers" will do have:

a. Gone to law school?

b. Taken the Bar exam?

c. Tried a case?

d. Know the laws of ALL the jurisdictions in which a PADI class is taught?

IF the answer to most of these questions is -- Not me -- then why, pray tell, should any of us give your opinions any credit on the legal issues of liability?

For the record -- I can answer "yes" to all but the last question and I ALWAYS make a statement that my comments about legal issues are either "in general in common law jurisdictions" or "in Washington." Also, for the record, PADI is not my insurer and has no legal responsibility to defend me if I am sued for "scuba instruction malpractice." My insurance carrier DOES have a legal responsibility to defend me if I am sued and IF my insurance carrier decided NOT to defend me, I would have a wonderful claim against it. Anyone want to bet on whether a jury would support me or the insurance company in such a claim?

Back to a question I thought DD had answered -- DD, is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is part of the PADI standards? Or is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is a "suggestion" and NOT part of the standards?

Peter,
I think the real issue of all of these posts about the PADI Standards, should be a "call" to every PADI instructor that is aware of this, to CALL PADI HQ and request that these Standards issues are dealt with right away.
If they could respond to this, as fast as they could respond to a an opportunity to market a new profit center, this could happen in the next month

 

[boulderjohn]

Peter,
I think the real issue of all of these posts about the PADI Standards, should be a "call" to every PADI instructor that is aware of this, to CALL PADI HQ and request that these Standards issues are dealt with right away.
If they could respond to this, as fast as they could respond to a an opportunity to market a new profit center, this could happen in the next month

And what do they demand, Dan? Do they say something like this:

"I understand that the standards as they are currently written do not in any way prohibit instructing this way. I understand that they allow this kind of instruction. I demand that you change the standards to show that they are already perfectly fine the way they are!"

---------- Post added July 16th, 2013 at 03:17 PM ----------

Just to get back to the original question of the thread, finding PADI instructors who area DIR comliant...

The Extreme Exposure dive shop in High Springs, Florida, is the world headquarters for GUE and DIR. It is as DIR as it gets. It does most of its recreational diving instruction through PADI.

 

[danvolker]

And what do they demand, Dan? Do they say something like this:

"I understand that the standards as they are currently written do not in any way prohibit instructing this way. I understand that they allow this kind of instruction. I demand that you change the standards to show that they are already perfectly fine the way they are!"

.

John, exactly how did you miss the 100 or so posts from everyone on here about how the supposed "Standards" don't mean anything, in their present form?

 

[tkdgodess]

Page 45 padi instructor manual.cw1.. 8. Swim with scuba equipment while maintaining control of both direction and depth. What do most of you think they want?

 

[DevonDiver]

Quick question -- how many of you posters who are discussing what "the Court" or "the lawyers" will do have....why, pray tell, should any of us give your opinions any credit on the legal issues of liability?

I can only speak for myself, but my intention throughout the thread has (I have stated repeatedly), never exceeded a desire to explain why many PADI instructors act as they do with course provision.

I suspect most PADI instructors have no more legal awareness than that provided to them by PADI itself. On IDC, PADI educate the following points;

Instructor Development Course Curriculum – Legal Responsibility and Risk Management

What is your legal responsibility and how does that affect legal risk?


1. When an individual comes to you for scuba instruction, a legal relationship exists. Because you are a knowledgeable professional, you have an obligation to protect that student diver from harm in a potentially hazardous environment.


2. As a scuba instructor, you have a responsibility (duty of care) to:


a. Follow PADI Standards.
b. Exercise sound judgment - err on the side of safety.
c. Follow local practices (where appropriate).
d. Have appropriate safety equipment available.
e. Be prepared to respond in an emergency.
f. Certify only those student divers who meet performance requirements.

Failure to use this level of care, or committing some act that a reasonably prudent scuba instructor would not commit or failing to do what a reasonably prudent
scuba instructor would do under similar circumstances may be viewed as negligence.

Legal risk is the possibility that a legal decision may require you to pay another party to compensate for the damages caused by your action or inaction as a dive
professional. In some countries, you may face not only civil risk (personal injury), but criminal risk as well.


5. You are also at risk for legal action if you violate local or federal regulations, professional codes of practice, etc. Civil and criminal risks, laws and precedents vary
from country to country and local area to local area.

.........

Three components of the PADI System function as important risk management tools – PADI Standards, educational materials and student diver paperwork. All components are interdependent upon each other and work best when used together.


2. As discussed in the General Standards and Procedures presentation, PADI Standards are the foundation of a proven educational system. By following standards, you conduct PADI courses and programs that are educationally valid, globally consistent and backed by the entire PADI organization.


a. If any part of the PADI System is questioned – for example, a particular skill or the order in which material is presented – International PADI Inc. defends this – not you. This defense could be significant if you are faced with a claim.
......
Instructional systems provide legal protection for the instructor.


a. When using an instructional system, the burden of proof in terms of educational validity and training adequacy shifts from you to the program designers


b. For risk management purposes, it’s important to use the system as prescribed. Deviating from a proven system will cause you to have to defend your actions and establish yourself as an instructional design authority.


3. Instructional systems ensure that all course material and important objectives are covered in a proper sequence.

DD, is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is part of the PADI standards? Or is it your contention that the "Guide to Teaching" is a "suggestion" and NOT part of the standards?

I don't believe that the 'Guide to Teaching' is a standard. It is, however, more than a 'suggestion'... it is formal guidance to instructors.

Re-quote: Three components of the PADI System function as important risk management tools – PADI Standards, educational materials and student diver paperwork. All components are interdependent upon each other and work best when used together.

 

[Bubble Junky]

Confined Water 3 is when students learn to get themselves into a state of neutral buoyancy, and as Andy states, we should not shift skills between CW dives. However, there's nothing stopping the instructor getting the student into the neutral state. I spend a lot of time on the 'breathing underwater' skill. I pay attention to the breathing of each student and see if they rise at all on inhalation. I like to see them rise a little so I know they are not overweighted, then I start the rest of the skills. If I have overestimated their weighting, then I'll maybe remove a weight if needed, and/or add some air for them. This is all briefed and explained to the student, so they get to realise the importance of breathing and its link to buoyancy from the first moment their head goes underwater.

Now I can conduct CW1 & 2 with my students neutral and no standards have been broken. When I get to CW 3 then I teach the students to attain this state of buoyancy for themselves. It is now easier for them to achieve this because they already have 'the feeling' of what it is like to be neutral...