This is definitely a shame and I will most certainly never dive with that instructor in Australia. The buddy rule is important and should always be obeyed to prevent events such as this from happening. I also feel that the instructor diving with the victim is responsible.
Coroner's findings in 5 scuba death's
- Thread starter iwoods
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
ShakaZulu:
While there is definately culpability on the part of the victim, it's pretty much an unwritten rule that you always escort your buddy and he/she where ever they may go. So while -legally- there may be no culpability on the part of the DM... there should be.
If you've established a buddy relationship during a dive, you don't violate the buddy rules.
hmmmm
1, Both should have known better.
2, Unfortunately divers are sometimes willing to dosregard their training when a suggestion to do so is made by a DM or instructor (the role model thing)
3, Not that it excuses the mistakes but given the medical conditions the outcome may have been the same even if the instructor hadn't insisted on extending her dive...though I tend to think (without evidence) that a rapid ascent was at the heart of the matter and that might have been prevented.
1, Both should have known better.
2, Unfortunately divers are sometimes willing to dosregard their training when a suggestion to do so is made by a DM or instructor (the role model thing)
3, Not that it excuses the mistakes but given the medical conditions the outcome may have been the same even if the instructor hadn't insisted on extending her dive...though I tend to think (without evidence) that a rapid ascent was at the heart of the matter and that might have been prevented.
aquaoren
Contributor
I disagree, Mrs. Barrington didn't belong into the water at all with her medical history and conditions, she was aware of and knowingly lied about.Dive4Life:
cdiver2
Contributor
aquaoren:
Although she lied it do's not excuse leaving your buddy. On top of this she new there was anxiety at the start of the dive and very probably throughout the dive, clue using air at a very rapid rate. Another point to think about Mrs Barrington was leading the dive and "looking back to check about every two minuets". After the problems at the start of the dive I would have had her along side of me at all times.
Yes there were two people wrong in this case.
Mike I think I agree with you on this one. Anxiety at the start of the dive and it probably increased when she was alone leading to a rapid ascent.
I agree that Ms. Barrington's decision to continue diving when diving was clearly contraindicated by her lung condition was the root cause of the accident.
The buddy's actions were not appropriate but were secondary to the cause of the accident.
The regulatory implications of the suggestion for an annual med exam for divers are a little scary. A flight physical makes sense for pilots given that they are capable of carrying passengers and crashing aircraft into schools, churches, etc and killing innocent bystanders. However in the US a private pilot is only required to get a physical every 2 years. And more importantly, the underlying argument does not really apply to diving as divers don't carry passengers and are not a threat to any innocent bystanders. In essence the only person who would be protected by a annual med eval would be the diver and the diver is already in a position to know their health condition and make the choice whether to dive or not.
Ms. Barrington clearly knew she should not have been diving but dove anyway. Had legislation requiring a medical vertificate been in effect, the lack of a current medical certification may have kept her off a chartered dive boat, but it would not have prevented her from shore diving or from diving off a freind's vessel. So at best it would have just changed the location of her eventual fatal accident.
The buddy's actions were not appropriate but were secondary to the cause of the accident.
The regulatory implications of the suggestion for an annual med exam for divers are a little scary. A flight physical makes sense for pilots given that they are capable of carrying passengers and crashing aircraft into schools, churches, etc and killing innocent bystanders. However in the US a private pilot is only required to get a physical every 2 years. And more importantly, the underlying argument does not really apply to diving as divers don't carry passengers and are not a threat to any innocent bystanders. In essence the only person who would be protected by a annual med eval would be the diver and the diver is already in a position to know their health condition and make the choice whether to dive or not.
Ms. Barrington clearly knew she should not have been diving but dove anyway. Had legislation requiring a medical vertificate been in effect, the lack of a current medical certification may have kept her off a chartered dive boat, but it would not have prevented her from shore diving or from diving off a freind's vessel. So at best it would have just changed the location of her eventual fatal accident.
iwoods:
I idly read through this only to find that it happened in my home town, that I know the Dive shop and John (a very experienced PADI CD and Cave Instructor) and that I had never heard of this case before.
cdiver2:
I agree. To my mind it was negligent of the instructor to leave Ms Barrington to ascend alone. It may not have prevented the tragedy had the instructor buddied her up but then again .... at least if the instructor had accompanied Ms Barrington if it was panic that contributed to rapid ascent, that panic might not have happened in the first place. If the ascent was too rapid, instructor could have slowed it. When the convulsion occurred instructor could have had Ms Barrington at the surface and out of water immediately (remember instrcutor watched her go up to 5-6m). Then she could have given rescue breathing to the victim immediately.
Hindsight is wonderful. But let's make sure we all learn these lessons.
But without question Ms Barrington shouldn't have been in the water at all with her medical history.
A quick question:
"hookah" equipment is mentioned in relation to another of the deaths in this report. What is "hookah" equipment?
Thanks,
Morty
P.S. Thanks for posting this report! Very informative.
"hookah" equipment is mentioned in relation to another of the deaths in this report. What is "hookah" equipment?
Thanks,
Morty
P.S. Thanks for posting this report! Very informative.
deepdiverbc
Contributor
Thanks for posting this. This report is a good lesson on how accidents are not always preceded by obvious alarms.
Yes she was anxious at the start of the dive but she seemed calm during the dive. Yes she used more air than the instructor but I know many divers that use more air than I do.
Trying to annalize if the diver needed to be accompanied to the surface assumes that it is always possible to assess the risk level. I believe that it is not always possible to do so and that safe diving practices should always be followed.
It is my opinion that accidents are frequently an accumulation of little mistakes rather than one big obvious one. Consequently it is unrealistic for anyone to think that they will always see an accident coming and it should be understood that even small deviations from safe diving practices when added to the sum total of previous mistakes can create dangerous situations.
I sent the following e-mail to divers that I know.
Conisider these questions and ask yourself. Would you allow your buddy to ascend alone allowing you to continue another 15 minutes of your dive or would you abort the dive.
1. The buddy has 25 years experience but took a break from diving for a while.
2. The buddy recently completed a PADI basic open water course to upgrade skills.
3. The buddy has not indicated any health problems.
4. The buddy was a bit anxious on the surface but once under water communicated well and seemed calm.
5. The buddy was using air faster than you.
6. The buddy indicated that they were down to 1000 psi and wanted to surface from about 60 feet.
7. Visibility was at about 50 feet and the buddy indicated they were willing to surface alone.
Continue the dive or abort?
http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/courts/...ton.finding.htm
Yes she was anxious at the start of the dive but she seemed calm during the dive. Yes she used more air than the instructor but I know many divers that use more air than I do.
Trying to annalize if the diver needed to be accompanied to the surface assumes that it is always possible to assess the risk level. I believe that it is not always possible to do so and that safe diving practices should always be followed.
It is my opinion that accidents are frequently an accumulation of little mistakes rather than one big obvious one. Consequently it is unrealistic for anyone to think that they will always see an accident coming and it should be understood that even small deviations from safe diving practices when added to the sum total of previous mistakes can create dangerous situations.
I sent the following e-mail to divers that I know.
Conisider these questions and ask yourself. Would you allow your buddy to ascend alone allowing you to continue another 15 minutes of your dive or would you abort the dive.
1. The buddy has 25 years experience but took a break from diving for a while.
2. The buddy recently completed a PADI basic open water course to upgrade skills.
3. The buddy has not indicated any health problems.
4. The buddy was a bit anxious on the surface but once under water communicated well and seemed calm.
5. The buddy was using air faster than you.
6. The buddy indicated that they were down to 1000 psi and wanted to surface from about 60 feet.
7. Visibility was at about 50 feet and the buddy indicated they were willing to surface alone.
Continue the dive or abort?
http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/courts/...ton.finding.htm
Similar threads
