Are resort DM's really that reckless?

[J.R.]

I agree and im sure most do, but this is not how it is! Some people do follow blindly and despite it being their fault, DM's and people in authority need to accept this and plan accordingly.

As written, this arguement can't be argued with... what makes it so solid is your use of one simple word... "some".

I've listened to the "Some-arugment" for years and on broad ranges of topic... "Some" is a hard thing to plan around... because while "Some" fit your selected criteria to a "T"... "some" others don't... and "some" do... but don't think they do... "Some" spend hours arguing with you because they think they know better... "Some" do know better... "Some" just like to argue... "Some" don't have a clue what they're talking about but have convinced themselves they know better anyway.

I would disagree that dive planning, particularly in a broad brush sense needs to accept this and plan accordingly... if I'm planning for a dive for a group I plan for what I've come to see as the easy side of average. "Some" are going to be bored silly... "some" are still going to percieve themselves to 'excessively challenged'... *MOST* are going to do just fine.


The problem with *some* arguements is that it generally is used to justify centering attention on the special class of individual who meets the *some* criteria... and the variety of *some* special consideration variables is infinate... which makes planning for all of these special cases *somewhat* impossible.

This is one of the reasons why you are TAUGHT in class to "PLAN YOUR DIVE... DIVE YOUR PLAN"... this is why you, as a diver, are taught to make up you own mind... make your own decisions and not be a sheep in the water... don't go where you don't feel comfortable in going... *MOST* people get this... *some* people don't... this simple *rule* of diving is the best safety device you have... and if you're not psychologially capable of following it... stay out of my part of the ocean... I'd just as soon not be anywhere near somebody who can only think responsibly *some* of the time and, by their incapacity for self-management, potentially endanger me or the other divers.

... the other thing is that I can't plan for the *some* I don't know about... Did you know people lie? Did you know that people are often reluctant to tell the truth about their dive experience... or 'fluff up their resumes"??? Yep... and they do this because they don't want to look like the 'weak kids' on the boat... THEY fill out their own log books... if they over inflate their ability... it might help to protect ME if something goes wrong... but it won't do YOU any good. *Some* may do it to eliminate the stress of being percieved as a newbie... *some* may do it out of psychologoical arrogance... *some* may do it out of a need to feel superior to others... *some* may have just "made an honest mistake"... but I can't tell the difference...

So... I plan for what the *average* diver should be able to do... I plan an excersion that I hope is interesting an one that *some* of the people will enjoy...

... make *some* sense???

(... ya' know... I'll be darned if PADI isn't right again... "narrowing of focus" IS a good indicator of stress... )

 

[String]

You think not? I'd be willing to bet that if I was a brand new PADI diver and walked into a "PADI 5 Star Dive Facility" and signed up for a boat dive guided by a PADI DM, who promptly took me into a cave where I ran out of air, panicked and died, a jury would see it quite differently.

Show me PROOF that is the case rather than guessing.
When you qualify as a diver you dont sign control of your entire life away to the certifying agency. You have no legal obligation other than when representing them. As a guide you are not representing them.

People who sign up for a guided dive with a DM are doing so because they want someone to keep them out of trouble.

No they dont. They want a guide to show them the decent parts of a dive site. If they want a babysitter they pay for one and specifically ask for one. You dont get and expect nannying to cover up your bad dive skills automatically. Plus most people end up with a DM guide because dive companies and/or local laws force them onto people not for any other reason.

They have the right to expect a reasonably safe dive that at the very least doesn't include being taken far beyond their training and into unsafe areas.

Again, nobody takes them, they take themselves.

Even if the DM feels lazy and doesn't bother checking air,

Why should a dive guide have go bother checking air of supposedly qualified individuals ? Do you go on a tour on land and expect the guide to check repeatedly if you need water, the toilet or to remind you to breathe in and out?

diver condition and qualifications, the very minimum would be to not actively take the divers somewhere unsafe.

Terry

Again only the diver themselves are responsible for deciding what to them is safe or unsafe. Nobody else.

 

[Sas]

It's a problem alright. I really hope it doesn't arise. Let's think about it from the other side - if you're a DM in an emergency, do you want your wards to do what they're told, or do you want them pausing to decide whether they agree?

Pausing to decide whether they agree.

 

[String]

Not necessarily. Many times, the DM is foisted upon you whether you want him or not. This was my experience in Egypt and Hawaii - and will be in Cozumel as well.

A few reasons for that. Firstly, local laws. Egypt for example (along with Greece and other places i can think of) its illegal to dive without a registered local. The main reason for this is to stop them stealing artefacts or completely destroying the reef and so on.
Other places uses it because its the easiest way to get a large group of divers around a dive site and back to the boat whilst remaining on some sort of schedule.
When i go diving i actively seek out operations that dont force a divemaster onto me but in some countries that isnt possible or even legal.

Ok - but arent DM's professional divers representing that agency?

Only if they're performing an agency run scheme. Guiding isnt. You don't need to be ANYTHING to guide a dive- you're there to point things out. Anyone can do that.

Doesn't change the fact that she spilled the coffee on herself. And regardless 2.8 million dollars is rediculous and 640k is not much better. seaducer)

Agree its gross stupidity. You buy something hot, you get in a car which isnt a stable platform and you spill it. I struggle to see how anyone else is at fault there except you. Ive spilt coffee on myself driving before now. Amazingly, im happy to accept it was completely my fault, there was a risk of it happening and it happened. However, i forgot to sue myself for my own stupidity.

My view: when you start a PADI course, you put complete faith in your instructor. Sure, you have a responsibility to follow their instructions, but by word, action or omission they have it in their power to injure you badly, in your very first enclosed water session.

The first thing myself and other instructors i know tell students is do NOT put complete faith in me or anyone else. Yes we'll do the best we can but there are some situations where we cannot possibly help you for example breath hold and bolting etc.
They're also taught the whole point of confined water is to get them to the stage that if the instructor vapourised on the open water dives they have enough skill to get THEMSELVES to the surface and out of the water. Until they reach that level they aren't safe to be in open water.
Training from day 1 is all about impressing on them self reliance, responsibility and thinking, its not about creating sheep who need to follow a babysitter around a reef.

Before reading this thread, as a newly qualified diver myself, I assumed that this level of trust would extend to a PADI divemaster. The contract, to me, seems to be: "I'm hiring you as a qualified guide. I'm a allowed to think for myself down there, but when given a direct instruction, I obey, because that's what gives you the leverage to keep me safe."

A DM has that trust/authority if he's conducting a PADI (or whatever agency) sanctioned programme. Guiding comes outside that. Anyone can guide a dive and often the best dive guides are unqualified (at all) locals who know the site in massive detail as they've dived it for years. They don't have to take any responsibility for your dive though in the same way a land based tour guide isnt responsible for making sure you dont pee yourself without being reminded.

-ukslim-
I see it as being like passing a driving test. Sure you're legally allowed on the road, but you still have lots to learn.

That's true. And you learn it by going out there yourself and driving and gradually increasing experience. You don't hire a lead car to follow to all destinations and expect him to stop you crashing somehow.

 

[J.R.]

The point about the trust is that from the very first lesson you *do* put trust in your instructor. Lesson one, you don't even set up your own kit. The only way you know you must never hold your breath is because your instructor told you. They forget to tell you, you can overinflate your lung right there in the swimming pool. Even experienced divers put a lot of trust in third parties: you only buy gas from reputable shops, right - because you believe you can trust them.

While I can't fundimentally disagree with what you've said I would point a few extra things for you to think about in your evaluation:

1: Yes... you trust your instructor... but the setting your diving in is somewhat 'staged'... when you begin your instruction diving is done in a VERY controlled environment and in a very controlled way. The structured teaching allows for safety for both instructor and student... it also keeps the 'work load' on the new student at a minimum so that they can focus. If you noticed... as your course went on the 'workload' became more complex.

2: By the end of the class you ARE setting up your own kit... what's happening (or should be) is a growing 'self confidence'... inherently you MUST put your initial trust in the instructor because you don't have faith in yourself yet... part of what you're learning is to develop that self confidence. By the time you get in open water I need to be able to trust you as much as you trust me... being a dive-buddy is a reciprocal situation and it is as likely that you may need to come to MY aid as it is I may have to come to yours.

3: Do I *trust* my air fill guy? Well... in my LDS I *am* the air fill guy... But service records on the compressor should be available for inspection if you have any questions... and if your dive shop won't show them to you... find another fill station... (I'd note that if you get to diving NITROX you "trust but verify"... each diver is required to test the gas mix for themselves before a dive... and log the mix and it's "max depth"...)

Yes... there is a certain degree of 'trust' involved in diving... I can't and won't argue with that... but there's an old saying in poker that goes, "Trust everyone but CUT THE CARDS."... It isn't the things that go right that put you at risk... it's the occasional "OOPS"... and one has to ask themselves why a 3rd party should bear more responsibilty for your safety than you yourself does?

 

[Web Monkey]

Show me PROOF that is the case rather than guessing.
When you qualify as a diver you dont sign control of your entire life away to the certifying agency. You have no legal obligation other than when representing them. As a guide you are not representing them.

You seem to have a different opinion than all the new divers that post here and describe how they thought that because they were on a dive led by a DM that they were safe.

Again, nobody takes them, they take themselves.

By definition, if the dive is being led by a "Dive Master", they are being taken on a dive.

Why should a dive guide have go bother checking air of supposedly qualified individuals?

Because they're trained to do so and know that people who go Someplace Warm on vacation every couple of years aren't "qualified" regardless of what the C-card says.

Again only the diver themselves are responsible for deciding what to them is safe or unsafe. Nobody else.

That's just fine for qualified divers, who typically don't dive with a DM anyway. The people who sign up for "guided dives" expect that they'll get more than some guy who knows where the octopus lives and certainly don't expect to be led directly into a potentially dangerous situation.

Terry

 

[String]

Yes... there is a certain degree of 'trust' involved in diving

Agreed but the less trust there is in diving the safer the diving becomes. As it forces people to actually THINK for themselves.

 

[ukslim]

When you qualify as a diver you dont sign control of your entire life away to the certifying agency. You have no legal obligation other than when representing them. As a guide you are not representing them.

My sense as a customer is that if I approach a shop with a large PADI sign in the window, and ask them to guide me through a dive, that they are representing PADI.

I might be wrong, but it's the naive assumption I would make.

 

[String]

You seem to have a different opinion than all the new divers that post here and describe how they thought that because they were on a dive led by a DM that they were safe.

Then they need to start thinking for themselves. They qualified as a diver. That means they have to take responsibility. If they weren't qualified they'd have a point. Once you pass that milestone you know enough to make your own decisions.

By definition, if the dive is being led by a "Dive Master", they are being taken on a dive.

No more than if i follow a DM on a bar crawl through my own choice im being "taken" on a bar crawl. There are no such definitions. Qualification is completely irrelevant once you are no longer representing the agency on one of its specifically approved programmes. A DM simply guiding is no more representing his agency then he is when driving his car, in a bar or playing tennis.

Warm on vacation every couple of years aren't "qualified" regardless of what the C-card says.

They are qualified. It doesn't mean they're any good but again the only person really who has to live with that problem is themselves. The qualification exists, therefore they are responsible. Certifications cant be revoked, they were taught how to do it and its not the DMs or anyone elses problem if the divers themselves cant live up to what they were taught.

I still laugh at this "led into a potentially dangerous situation". Would these same people on land follow a tour guide on a short cut across a minefield because they "thought" there was a safe route? Or climb up a cliff to save some time as "it'll be fine"? Or run across 8 lines of traffic because "i do it all the time"? If not then why would they entirely disengage their brain underwater and do something similar?

 

[String]

My sense as a customer is that if I approach a shop with a large PADI sign in the window, and ask them to guide me through a dive, that they are representing PADI.

I might be wrong, but it's the naive assumption I would make.

It is wrong. All that means is they can teach PADI courses. PADI dont have a "guided dive" course.

Its no different to walking into somewhere like Dixons and thinking they represent Sony - they don't and many things in that shop are different products from different companies.