Diver Death in Cayman

[CDNScubaMoose]

I am not and will not read 700+ posts, I am basing my opinion on what I have gotten from the last 150 or so in this thread. I do not see it as uncalled for, a bit harsh, maybe, but not uncalled for.

So far I have seen her give information out, good for her, but she is intentionally for lack of a better word (dangling information in front of our noses) information that would tell US how the poor soul met his demise. You know things like, "I have his computer profile but I you can't see it" or "Because I know all the facts and you don't." It is saying things like this that get people, myself included, a little confused as to your motives. I understand trying to figure out what happened, but to me it smells a bit more like someone out looking for a reason that it wasn't the poor kids fault in some places.

call me an arse, call what you like.

I know what it is like to watch someone die, and you have no way to control it.

I won't call you an arse - I'll say that you are uneducated and possibly on the lazy side since if you were truely interested in understanding how to prevent this from reoccuring you would read the entire thread. If you pay attention you can see how the OP has evolved in her posts. There is no doubt that at the beginning she was hurt and needed to express herself. In a few short days she has provided a lot of insight into what occured. I still disagree with her on how much responsibility divers (new or old alike) should be placing on DM's but I respect that she has continued to try to answer our questions so that we might be able to improve the safety of diving for the future. If you can't offer anything constructive then why post other then to be at the center of attention?

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

In an effort to try to focus this thread and prevent a world wide shortage in popcorn ... here are my thoughts on what we should be looking at discussing:

1) Decision making on the part of the DM/Dive Op - Is there anybody going to claim that this was an acceptable dive site to take newer divers to? If no then I think we can put this to bed - I would be interested in knowing more about the topography of the divesite and the OP has given us a dive site so if anyone is familar with it then please share some details. The other aspect ... who's decision was it to go to this dive site - the DM or the Dive Op?

2) How did the seperation occur and perhaps whose responsibility it was to watch who? Did the deceased swim off on his own (possibly due to narcosis - actually with the depths in question, very likely), did the DM lead in a way that made things difficult for everyone to stay together, or was there natural forces such as current? I have seen newer divers on reefs stay further away from the reef since they were unsure of their bouyancy - is this the case here? Perhaps he saw a fish and with narcosis swam deeper to follow it?

3) One thing that troubles me is the number of participants in this thread who believe the DM is there for safety reasons. Are there instructors out there that are promoting this idea or is it an assumption that isn't being corrected? If so then how do we work towards eliminating this thinking - we've had mention of signs posted that are visible, there is a thread by JimLap that perhaps all new (old salts too maybe) divers should be reading, should we be requesting the various agencies to promote personal responsibility better?

I'm sure there are a few other things that I missed that we can continue to discuss but the fact of the matter is that one of own has died and his loved ones have likely or will likely stumble upon this thread when they are ready ... I believe that we as a community should work to try ensure that this tragedy wasn't in vain.

 

[JCAT]

Not having someone on the boat I guess shows disrespect for the law of the land. This view is reinforced by disrespect of PADI's guidelines for OW depths.

A major contributing factor appears to be having the new diver well outside his training comfort zone. I say 'appears' cos COD hasn't been clearly communicated. What is an MI - I'm not familiar with this term.

postscript: Ok, so MI is a heart attack. God knows how you've jumped to that conclusion. Seems way down the %age likelihood scales to me...

Thx,
J

Remember this is speculation on my part. I know nothing for a fact until I see the autopsy brief at least.

Based on what the OP has said so far. Somewhere back the last several hundred posts, the OP stated "He did not drown" That means possibly no or little water in the lungs. That leads me to believe that, either he stopped breathing at depth. A massive MI(left coronary artery blowout) fits here, or he shot to the surface and died there from a gas embolism. He might have went to the surface because he was in pain from a MI or just prior.

At 58, the diver is in the age group where this is plausible. I can dig out DAN's data which could confirm this is a leading cause of diver death in this age group. If it's not number one, it's right up there. I know Dan's reporting is passive, but I think it gives a good indication on where we stand in the diving community.

 

[InTheDrink]

Remember this is speculation on my part. I know nothing for a fact until I see the autopsy brief at least.

Based on what the OP has said so far. Somewhere back the last several hundred posts, the OP stated "He did not drown" That means possibly no or little water in the lungs. That leads me to believe that, either he stopped breathing at depth. A massive MI(left coronary artery blowout) fits here, or he shot to the surface and died there from a gas embolism. He might have went to the surface because he was in pain from a MI or just prior.

At 58, the diver is in the age group where this is plausible. I can dig out DAN's data which could confirm this is a leading cause of diver death in this age group. If it's not number one, it's right up there. I know Dan's reporting is passive, but I think it gives a good indication on where we stand in the diving community.

Ok, thanks for the clarification of your reasoning. Don't you think an embolism is much more likely here given we know (or at least have been told) that the diver returned from 346ft to surface in 2 mins?

Cheers,
J

 

[Thalassamania]

Also ... water in the lungs is not required. There are "dry" drownings.

 

[Dtaine]

Is it just a highly emotive topic?

I'd put my money on that being the reason it's kept going.

You cannot be responsible for your actions if you are in effect ignorant of your actions or their ramifications.

I'm sorry, but I just have to completely disagree with that statement. Maybe if we were talking about children, but that's just not the case.

 

[InTheDrink]

I'd put my money on that being the reason it's kept going.

I'm sorry, but I just have to completely disagree with that statement. Maybe if we were talking about children, but that's just not the case.

I didn't spend any time thinking my statement through so perhaps I'm off the mark. I'll think about it overnight. I do think though that there is some reasonable comparison with children for newbies in a non derogatory way. A new diver is in many ways like a child and at the mercies of those in authority. I agree, he should ultimately take responsibility for himself, but that is not well communicated to the average vacation diver.

postscript: perhaps I meant diminished responsibility rather than none.

 

[fosterboxermom]

In an effort to try to focus this thread and prevent a world wide shortage in popcorn ... here are my thoughts on what we should be looking at discussing:

1) Decision making on the part of the DM/Dive Op - Is there anybody going to claim that this was an acceptable dive site to take newer divers to? If no then I think we can put this to bed - I would be interested in knowing more about the topography of the divesite and the OP has given us a dive site so if anyone is familiar with it then please share some details. The other aspect ... who's decision was it to go to this dive site - the DM or the Dive Op?

2) How did the separation occur and perhaps whose responsibility it was to watch who? Did the deceased swim off on his own (possibly due to narcosis - actually with the depths in question, very likely), did the DM lead in a way that made things difficult for everyone to stay together, or was there natural forces such as current? I have seen newer divers on reefs stay further away from the reef since they were unsure of their bouyancy - is this the case here? Perhaps he saw a fish and with narcosis swam deeper to follow it?

3) One thing that troubles me is the number of participants in this thread who believe the DM is there for safety reasons. Are there instructors out there that are promoting this idea or is it an assumption that isn't being corrected? If so then how do we work towards eliminating this thinking - we've had mention of signs posted that are visible, there is a thread by JimLap that perhaps all new (old salts too maybe) divers should be reading, should we be requesting the various agencies to promote personal responsibility better?

I'm sure there are a few other things that I missed that we can continue to discuss but the fact of the matter is that one of own has died and his loved ones have likely or will likely stumble upon this thread when they are ready ... I believe that we as a community should work to try ensure that this tragedy wasn't in vain.

1. The DM made the choice AFTER he heard about what experience we had as divers.

2. I don't know the answers to those questions. Only Brendan knows. I can say that the DM did lead the group and I didn't see him look back at anytime until the middle of the dive when we were going to make our second left turn and that is when we discovered Brendan was missing. That is when he turned to me and asked "where's your buddy"?

3. I have mixed feelings about that issue. I know I am responsible for myself, however, I feel there is some responsibility that is placed on the DM or they wouldn't be given the training or some wouldn't be so strick on some dives I have done. Such as roll call and head counts, etc. We look to them as a figure of authority and respect as you would a teacher. I think as parents do teachers have some responsibility in keeping their children safe. I am not implying we are children. Please don't take this out of context. I am purely using it as an analogy.

 

[fosterboxermom]

Also ... water in the lungs is not required. There are "dry" drownings.

True, I just learned this and I was amazed! I have a pool and I am very careful now with children around it.

 

[JCAT]

Ok, thanks for the clarification of your reasoning. Don't you think an embolism is much more likely here given we know (or at least have been told) that the diver returned from 346ft to surface in 2 mins?

Cheers,
J

I don't know. He could have embolised (sp) on his way up and that caused heart failure at the surface. Just speculation on my part.

This thread has taken many turns and here's the rub. As cold as it sounds, everything must be analyzed to the nth degree and that includes the actual cause of death and the time line.

I'm not ready to place blame anywhere. Just want to know all the facts, so the diving community can learn.