Bahamas: Missing Female Diver

[Thalassamania]

Sorry J, nothing "macho" about it at all. Even if her incompetence was "nothing more" than taking an assignment that she did not know she wasn't up to, that's still incompetence. Maybe that lack of insight into her own personal preparedness was her only offense, maybe she had gotten away with it a thousand times before and grown complacent, it still cost a life, it was still unacceptable.

 

[Web Monkey]

To make the black/white assumption that any instructor that doesn't surface with their charge is incompetent is both foolish and insensitive.

I dive with students and inexperienced divers quite often and can tell you with great certainty that "buddy distance" is the same or less than "grabbing distance", and if your buddy (especially one that hired you) is blowing the dive plan, it's time for a little quick underwater communication, followed by an ascent if necessary.

This might be insensitive, but it's definitely not foolish.

Terry

 

[bsee65]

I agree with Thal, and think some of you aren't getting the point. There are clearly multiple factors in this accident and multiple questions to be answered. Did the victim descend intentionally? Did she do it intending harm to herself? Was she narced? Did she have a stroke-related incident? Was she having bouyancy problems? Was she just ornery? Was she incapable? Speculate all you want on these possibilities as they factor into the accident.

However, whatever answers or ideas you come up with to explain the reason for the victim's descent and lack of cooperation, the DM was at fault for failing to bring the victim to the surface. Some may believe that a victim putting up some amount of fight excuses the DM's inability to make a rescue. We don't have any real information about what prevented the DM from controlling the situation beyond comments that the victim was pushing her away. In any case, I think it is not unreasonable to hold the DM responsible while speculating on other aspects of the accident.

 

[stadevene]

I would think it reasonable to expect a rescue diver, DM, or instructor should be able to handle bringing someone to surface in nearly every instance. What we don't know is if this is one of those exception to the rule cases. Without the benefit of all of the eyewitness accounts and all of the investigator notes is it really fair to lay blame? I can see making the assumption however is this the correct line of thinking as an investigator?

I guess I'll defer to Thal and others who have experience in dive investigations but I have a couple of questions for the experts. Am I correct that investigators - while I'm sure it's tough - must try and eliminate their personal biases from a given situation? And for Thal, out of all the thousands of investigations you've done do you recall a time when your initial thought or supposition turned out to be incorrect? Or to put another way was there a case where, at the end of the investigation, you said something to the affect of "I never thought that was possible"?

 

[Thalassamania]

And for Thal, out of all the thousands of investigations you've done do you recall a time when your initial thought or supposition turned out to be incorrect? Or to put another way was there a case where, at the end of the investigation, you said something to the affect of "I never thought that was possible"?

Yes, fairly often throughout an investigation we'd change our minds, each piece of data would either support what we had summized or would lead to a different supposition. That's the case here too. But that really involves, as far as I can tell, the details, rather than the crucial issue.

 

[scubafanatic]

I couldn't, respectivefully, DISAGREE more!

...and yet, just think, despite everything you think you've learned from this thread....YOU were done in by 'killer flip-flops' in Cozumel just the other day!

 

[jaxjags64109]

I agree with Thal, and think some of you aren't getting the point. There are clearly multiple factors in this accident and multiple questions to be answered. Did the victim descend intentionally? Did she do it intending harm to herself? Was she narced? Did she have a stroke-related incident? Was she having bouyancy problems? Was she just ornery? Was she incapable? Speculate all you want on these possibilities as they factor into the accident.

However, whatever answers or ideas you come up with to explain the reason for the victim's descent and lack of cooperation, the DM was at fault for failing to bring the victim to the surface. Some may believe that a victim putting up some amount of fight excuses the DM's inability to make a rescue. We don't have any real information about what prevented the DM from controlling the situation beyond comments that the victim was pushing her away. In any case, I think it is not unreasonable to hold the DM responsible while speculating on other aspects of the accident.

...however, anyone posting anything other than complete agreement is subject to ridicule. That makes no sense to spend time on a forum where the intent is to demean anyones suggestion(s) that differs from your own. I personally want to read others ideas...I thought that was the purpose of this forum to share thoughts, ideas, knowledge, and ask questions... am I wrong?

I hope this thread continues long enough for us to get some more details (facts) about what happened. Until then, I've really appreaciated the thought provoking comments of others who make me think about diving from another's perspective. I believe I will be a better diver as a result of other's ideas even though I might not always agree. Thal has made his point and opinion known and I respect his insight, but I want to hear from others as well, and I believe he is demeaning others who offer other thoughts/opinions, and that demeaning approach may prevent someone from posting something that might help me as a fellow diver.

Thal...you can be right and still let others explore and exchange other thoughts and ideas. Allowing others to share freely does not diminish your authority in this area...may even reinforce what your experience brings to these worthwhile discussions.

Just my opinion.

 

[boulderjohn]

Am I correct that investigators - while I'm sure it's tough - must try and eliminate their personal biases from a given situation? And for Thal, out of all the thousands of investigations you've done do you recall a time when your initial thought or supposition turned out to be incorrect?

Any competent investigator or researcher is trained to do everything possible to avoid initial thoughts or suppositions. Unfortunately, high school English teachers too often teach students to "come up with a thesis and then look for evidence to support it." That leads the general population to assume (falsely) that this is the proper way to conduct research. That kind of thinking is extremely dangerous, because a researcher starting with that mindset will overlook contradictory evidence, overemphasize supporting evidence, and twist other evidence to support the initial theory. A proper investigative frame of mind starts with a neutrally worded investigative question, not a thesis or theory. A skilled investigator looks at all research objectively until conclusions begin to emerge.

As a curriculum Director, I once reviewed a course in forensic science written by someone who actually did the kind of work shown on the highly popular CSI shows. The writer talked about the absurdity of those shows, pointing out in particular how they always form theories immediately and then set out to prove those theories true. (Particulary CSI Miami, a show which tries to make sure that they stay as far from reality as possible.)

 

[cappyjon431]

Any competent investigator or researcher is trained to do everything possible to avoid initial thoughts or suppositions. Unfortunately, high school English teachers too often teach students to "come up with a thesis and then look for evidence to support it." That leads the general population to assume (falsely) that this is the proper way to conduct research. That kind of thinking is extremely dangerous, because a researcher starting with that mindset will overlook contradictory evidence, overemphasize supporting evidence, and twist other evidence to support the initial theory. A proper investigative frame of mind starts with a neutrally worded investigative question, not a thesis or theory. A skilled investigator looks at all research objectively until conclusions begin to emerge.

As a curriculum Director, I once reviewed a course in forensic science written by someone who actually did the kind of work shown on the highly popular CSI shows. The writer talked about the absurdity of those shows, pointing out in particular how they always form theories immediately and then set out to prove those theories true. (Particulary CSI Miami, a show which tries to make sure that they stay as far from reality as possible.)

John, I agree with 99% of your argument, but as a former college English lecturer, I have to disagree with your comments on the idea of "coming up with a thesis and then supporting it" as leading to dangerous thinking. That is a rhetorical technique for writing persuasive arguments and a tool for teaching students to be able to back up their claims with evidence. Too many students make nefarious claims and have NO IDEA how to support their arguments. Many students come out of high school with no critical thinking ability, and being able to support a claim with logic and/or evidence is an important skill that needs to be developed. The problem is that this is just one type of research, and should not be confused with accident analysis, forensic research, or other investigative sciences.

As you point out, the role of an investigator should include coming in with a blank slate and let the evidence dictate the direction of the investigation. This is a different type of research, but neither one leads to "extremely dangerous thinking." The problem occurs when people use the wrong research methods for the wrong intended purpose.

Hopefully this has not hijacked the thread too far from the issues.

 

[Thalassamania]

...however, anyone posting anything other than complete agreement is subject to ridicule. That makes no sense to spend time on a forum where the intent is to demean anyones suggestion(s) that differs from your own. I personally want to read others ideas...I thought that was the purpose of this forum to share thoughts, ideas, knowledge, and ask questions... am I wrong?

The purpose of this forum is to share thoughts, ideas, knowledge, and ask questions. Further it is to critically examine those thoughts and ideas. Those that do not stand up to scrutiny are rejected as ridiculous (if that's what you mean by ridicule). There is not intent (at least on my part) to "demean anyone's suggestion(s) that differs" from my own, I love it when I can gain additional insight from someone else who has seen something that I missed. I think most of us here are that way, but unexamined thoughts and ideas and answers to question that are not tested by debate are worse than useless.

I hope this thread continues long enough for us to get some more details (facts) about what happened. Until then, I've really appreaciated the thought provoking comments of others who make me think about diving from another's perspective. I believe I will be a better diver as a result of other's ideas even though I might not always agree. Thal has made his point and opinion known and I respect his insight, but I want to hear from others as well, and I believe he is demeaning others who offer other thoughts/opinions, and that demeaning approach may prevent someone from posting something that might help me as a fellow diver.

Thal...you can be right and still let others explore and exchange other thoughts and ideas. Allowing others to share freely does not diminish your authority in this area...may even reinforce what your experience brings to these worthwhile discussions.

Just my opinion.

Everyone is welcome to explore ideas and exchange thoughts, I have no power (or desire) to censor anything. But I have the right (possibly even the duty), just all members of the forum do, to express my views and critique others views as rigorously as possible. But this is not grade school where everyone gets an "A" just for trying, because that's the nice thing to do and it also isn't some other boards where name calling and character assassination are the order of the day. When you think that I'm right, say so. When you think I'm wrong, please, go for it ... that's what it's all about. But please don't whine that little ole Thal somehow prevents you from doing so, that's a copout.