Are resort DM's really that reckless?

[ScubaSteve]

......Unless the divemaster chained them to him and dragged them deeper they had a choice........

If the diver knows the depth and the conditions are exactly as described then I wholly agree.

I have been on several divemaster led dives where we exceeded the briefed depths by as much as 20'. While 20' may not usually be a big deal, it will be to a new diver who was teetering on the edge of comfort at the briefed depth. So, how responsible is it of the DM to essentially lie and force that new diver to make one of 2 bad choices....go deeper than they are comfortable OR stay at their comfortable depth and be too far from the group to be safe?

I also can say that there have been at least 2 situations where the brief included Zero, Nada, Zilch, Nothing about the swim thoughs that we taken (one natural and one wreck)....one was in St. Thomas and one was in Cozumel. So, it does happen where the divemaster will essentially drag the diver into situations that are not within their comfort. This is terribly unacceptable.

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

Thats the divers responsibility. Unless the divemaster chained them to him and dragged them deeper they had a choice. They're *qualified* divers. Part of that qualification is giving them the knowledge they need to decide whether to do a dive or not and what isnt within their limits.

If you booked a tour guide for some trip and the guide decided to walk off a 300ft cliff would you follow them?

Its personal responsibility and choice. A divemasters reason for existence is to help teach recognised agency courses. Nowhere is anything said about guiding. I see no reason why they should be expected to do any of that unless they're being paid for babysitting. If they ARE being paid to babysit then fair enough they have a mentoring role and responsibility. If they're just there to show someone the site then really, it isnt their problem.

I see what you're saying, although I still think any responsible diver (divemaster or not) would at least make sure before leading someone less qualified what certification they had. While I can see not wanting to check everyone's certification card, simply asking "is everyone here qualified to go to 130 feet" would be sufficient.

However, the bigger concern I'd have is: was it clear ahead of time these would be the conditions of the dive? If I sign up for a dive that says "we go past 100 feet" and I'm not comfortable with that, then I'm an idiot for signing up. But if I get on a boat that says "only OW required" and then I'm told "you either have to go down to 130 feet with us or you sit on the boat (and possibly no refunds), I'm gonna be a little ticked off.

I don't know the exact details of these situations (some of the posters have been directly invovled, so maybe they can shed the light), but it seems to me even though they may not be physically chained to the DM, these unsafe dives are less of informed decisions than you're letting on. What about the one person who said he was 100 feet below the surface and everyone had already entered an overhead space? His choices were enter the space which he was unqualified to do, or surface from 100 feet by himself (dangerous in its own right). If he was told of these conditions beforehand: maybe it was his fault, but this wasn't the impression I got.



If its against company policy you stop them from diving with you again. Ive done that many times to customers that ignored the safety brief.

 

[String]

So, it does happen where the divemaster will essentially drag the diver into situations that are not within their comfort. This is terribly unacceptable.

The diver isnt chained to the guy- he can say no, he can refuse a swimthrough, he can choose to abort. Its his choice.

 

[ScubaSteve]

The diver isnt chained to the guy- he can say no, he can refuse a swimthrough, he can choose to abort. Its his choice.

While technically you are right (literally speaking the diver is not chained....) it goes far beyond negligent in my mind. But, we are all different.

 

[String]

While I can see not wanting to check everyone's certification card, simply asking "is everyone here qualified to go to 130 feet" would be sufficient.

Qualification depths are a recommendation nothing more. Boat brief at the start or better yet in the shop just say "max depth max this". If people are happy they go, if not they dont.

However, the bigger concern I'd have is: was it clear ahead of time these would be the conditions of the dive? If I sign up for a dive that says "we go past 100 feet" and I'm not comfortable with that, then I'm an idiot for signing up.

That bit is fair enough - its ALWAYS the divers responsibility to check that BEFORE committing himself to a dive or a trip.

But if I get on a boat that says "only OW required" and then I'm told "you either have to go down to 130 feet with us or you sit on the boat (and possibly no refunds), I'm gonna be a little ticked off.

See above - check before leaving the shop. If the shop cant give that information or guarantees dive somewhere else. Never sign up to a dive without knowing details if you think theres a chance it might be beyond you.

What about the one person who said he was 100 feet below the surface and everyone had already entered an overhead space? His choices were enter the space which he was unqualified to do, or surface from 100 feet by himself (dangerous in its own right).

No its not. If the diver is incapable of performing a simple solo ascent and safety stop they shouldn't be diving without instruction. If there was no mention in the brief about a swimthrough then fair enough they can complain. If it WAS mentioned in the brief (which is likely) and they didnt say a word, its their own fault for not asking.

 

[String]

While technically you are right (literally speaking the diver is not chained....) it goes far beyond negligent in my mind. But, we are all different.

My philosophy is simple - if a diver is qualified he is 100% responsible for everything he does regarding diving.

If he ISNT qualified as a diver then the instructor has that responsibility.

 

[LowVizWiz]

Yes, but in these situations I think the blame is well placed. And in no way am I saying these people don't have some responsibility, but I think the vast majority rests with the dive master: he created the uncomfortable situation which is especially bad considering he's supposed to be the leader.

The dive limits are suggestions to the divers, but I'm pretty sure to a divemaster they are rules. If you are hired as a PADI divemaster for example, is it not your job to ensure that if you have OW trained divers, they don't go beyond their limits while under your supervision? Maybe I'm wrong and the job of a divemaster is to "take divers to whatever limits you feel like", but I'm guessing that isn't in the course book anywhere.

Maybe the tone of my initial post was harsh and it's misunderstood. Again I'm not suggesting that a DM does not have to be responsible with divers under his or her supervision. What I am suggesting is that Susie new OW diver, or any diver for that matter, never ever trust blindly in someone else when it comes to diving!

Losing you credit card is not quite the same as losing your life.

Wiz

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

No its not. If the diver is incapable of performing a simple solo ascent and safety stop they shouldn't be diving without instruction. If there was no mention in the brief about a swimthrough then fair enough they can complain. If it WAS mentioned in the brief (which is likely) and they didnt say a word, its their own fault for not asking.

I'm not saying he's incapable of doing it, but from 100 feet, a solo ascent is far from the ideal situation. What if you have an emergency situation where you need your buddies octo and: well your budies with the rest of your group. When you come up on a boat dive, I'd prefer to be with others to attract the attention of the boat (and hopefully come up where the boat is expecting you).

And I mean 99% of the time this wouldn't be an issue: the solo accent would go fine, the boat sees you, no big deal. But I still don't think it's a situation you should be put in unnecessarily.

I think we're actually in more agreement than it seems, a lot of it will come down to who is responsible for the vast difference of the expectations vs the reality.

Although the case one member brought up about a week ago where divemasters were encouraging him to go on a dive to 80 feet I still take issue with. It's one thing to not care if you're taking unqualified divers with you, it's quite another to start trying to convince them that it's a good idea!

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

Maybe the tone of my initial post was harsh and it's misunderstood. Again I'm not suggesting that a DM does not have to be responsible with divers under his or her supervision. What I am suggesting is that Susie new OW diver, or any diver for that matter, never ever trust blindly in someone else when it comes to diving!

Losing you credit card is not quite the same as losing your life.

Wiz

And sorry if I cam across wrong. I agree you should never trust blindly in someone. I'm just saying that new divers naturally do place at least "some" level of trust in the dive master: and 99% of the time this is a good thing.

 

[seaducer]

A resort DM leading a group of divers has one primary function, to lead certified divers through a dive site. It is not, nor should it be their job to ensure that all standards from all agencies are met regarding depth limit recommendations for each certification level.

In many cases reost operators can group divers by experience level, thus planning sites that are appropriate, but this is not always the case.

It is really up to the individual diver what they are comfortable with, and if need be you can hire a private DM for a few dollars more who will cater to your needs, comfort, and safety.

But the DM leading the dive is just showing you the site, pointing out interesting things, and making sure no one gets lost.