Diver dies in Islamorada

[Thalassamania]

Certified does mean she can swim, that's all she had to do once she was on the surface. If she signaled that she was OK to the instructor at the surface (we don't know if she did or didn't) and the boat crew had her next to the boat (at the ladder) I see no problem with the instructor leaving to get back to the other divers.

I think it is clear to everyone that she had to do something more than, "just swim." She had some other, unexpected, problem ... and that's what you need a buddy for, that's why you don't abandon a buddy or a student, certified or not.

If one of the other divers had a problem, everyone would have been screaming, why did he leave the group at 100' on a wreck. I believe he did the right thing, he saw her to the surface, got her to the boat, then got back to the other divers asap. I've seen divers hang onto the ladder for 10 minutes before climbing up.

I have no problem with the instructor transfering responsibility to a crew member for watching her board, whilst standing by to assist, it that (in fact) happened I'd shift my complaint to the crew member, but in either case, someone let her down ... big time. An unwitnessed fatality, at the surface, in the sort of situation this appears to have been is, IMHO, clear evidence of a negligent breach of duty, even if she had a massive coronary and was gone even before she fell back into the water.

These are the special rules for this forum:
...
(4) No trolling; no blamestorming. Mishap analysis does not lay blame, it finds causes.
...
Clearly there is no rule against speculation or hypothesis, although to speculate without clearly limited facts seems unwise. There is a rule against "blamestorming."

In my opinion it is too soon to really form any opinions about this accident. If a crew member did not jump into the water, there may be a very good reason. Remember the first rule of rescue is to avoid turning one injury/death into two.

It would be helpful if the folks nearer to this keep an eye out for more information in the local media or even do a little digging so we can all learn from this.

Jeff

No "blamestorming" here, just sound analysis: If responsibility for assistance had been shifted from the instructor to the crew member and the crew member was not prepared to handle the duty, either due to a lack of skill or the conditions, that still leaves the operator holding the bag for the Captain's decision to proceed with the dive. Had the crew member been attentive, had the diver suffered from a medical problem, and the crew member witnessed her falling back into the water and made the conscious decision that was too dangerous to enter the water and tossed a marker or ring, that would be one thing, but not knowing where the diver was or even that diver was having problems is unacceptable.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I didn't get that she was unresponsive while she floated away, but I'll go back and read it again.

I'm not saying that the op wasn't negligent, but I'm also not saying that they were. I'm saying that to me, there's not enough information to make that sort of judgment. I can think of scenarios that would prove either case.

One more thing... from first hand experience, the reporter usually doesn't get the story right.

That is why I said seemingly. I would have to think that if she was in trouble and knew it she would have signaled for help or responded to efforts of the crew to ascertain if she was ok. But we do not even know if they did that. I again wonder why no one went in to assist her when she kept getting further and further away. I do hope we get the full story on this. And one other thing that occurs to me is where was her buddy? If she even had one to begin with.

 

[Scott L]

Is it common place to wait until all divers are recovered from a 100ft+ dive before effecting a rescue of a flailing diver? Tough spot for a charter boat to be in for sure...

If there are divers under the boat, yes you have to wait before engaging the engines. Boat props hurt, the crew/captain most likely had no idea at what depth the other divers were at, one of the other divers could have been coming up at any time then you might have had 2 dead divers. (pure speculation, from a different perspective).

Thank you for the explanation. I am relatively new to wreck diving utilizing fixed moorings. Life long drift diver.

Did I miss where it said she was "flailing" in the water.

No. Speculation on my part and a poor choice of words. Perhaps she had drifted far enough from the stern of the boat for the boat crew to have recognized that she was in peril...

 

[High & Dry]

I have dove with Key Dives on several occasions and have dove the Eagle with them. Generally dive operators in the Keys do not put DMs in the water with the divers unless you pay extra, however, Key Dives is not one of these operations. They will put DMs in on all their dives, and the DMs are usually certified instructors. When diving the Eagle the DMs have been very cautious. The only disappointment I have had with Key Dives is when we were planning to dive the Eagle and the trip was moved to a shallow reef because there were inexperienced divers on the boat. Of course this was for the inexperienced divers safety.

As to why it would take so long to retrieve the distressed diver after she lost consiousness, that would be due to the time it took to recall the other divers from a 100' plus dive. Since the instructor returned to the group after assisting the distressed diver to the surface, the only one on the boat would have been the captain. The currents in that area are sometimes strong and it would not be advisable for the captain to jump in and leave no one on the boat. That could have turned it into an even greater tragedy.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the diver and family.

 

[Luku]

I think it is clear to everyone that she had to do something more than, "just swim." She had some other, unexpected, problem ... and that's what you need a buddy for, that's why you don't abandon a buddy or a student, certified or not.

I think whats clear is that there are too many unknowns in this news story to jump to conclusions about who is to blame. Typically when people are jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers I like to bring out a different perspective.

We can all theorize what happened but from the information given, its probably not wise to.

The word abandoned is used a lot here, she wasn't abandoned any more than a person who falls into a pit of deadly gas is "abandoned" by people wanting to rescue him but need to wait for the appropriate time / equipment to do so. Sometimes it just takes time to mobilize a rescue. The crew didn't lose her, they did go after her once they had retrieved the other divers and it was safe to do so. they didn't "abandon" her. The instructor didn't abandon her, she "made it safely to the stern of the boat".

I have no problem with the instructor transfering responsibility to a crew member for watching her board, whilst standing by to assist, it that (in fact) happened I'd shift my complaint to the crew member, but in either case, someone let her down ... big time.

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say "someone let her down" but rather it quite possibly was an unfortunate set of circumstances in play, to say someone let her down is casting judgment with out all the facts.

An unwitnessed fatality, at the surface, in the sort of situation this appears to have been is, IMHO, clear evidence of a negligent breach of duty, even if she had a massive coronary and was gone even before she fell back into the water.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion but to base it on a 6 paragraph news article seems silly to me.

No "blamestorming" here, just sound analysis: ... Had the crew member been attentive, had the diver suffered from a medical problem, and the crew member witnessed her falling back into the water and made the conscious decision that was too dangerous to enter the water and tossed a marker or ring, that would be one thing, but not knowing where the diver was or even that diver was having problems is unacceptable.

Where does it say in the article they ever lost sight of her. They did recall divers, usually you only do that if there is a problem, so by saying they didn't know where she was and didn't know she was having problems is a huge assumption on your part.

Sorry Thall, I do agree with most things you say but this seems a little off base for me.

 

[Thalassamania]

I think whats clear is that there are too many unknowns in this news story to jump to conclusions about who is to blame. Typically when people are jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers I like to bring out a different perspective.

We can all theorize what happened but from the information given, its probably not wise to.

The word abandoned is used a lot here, she wasn't abandoned any more than a person who falls into a pit of deadly gas is "abandoned" by people wanting to rescue him but need to wait for the appropriate time / equipment to do so. Sometimes it just takes time to mobilize a rescue. The crew didn't lose her, they did go after her once they had retrieved the other divers and it was safe to do so. they didn't "abandon" her. The instructor didn't abandon her, she "made it safely to the stern of the boat".

Safey to the stern of the boat is almost, but not quite, safely on deck ... almost only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades and nuclear weapons.

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say "someone let her down" but rather it quite possibly was an unfortunate set of circumstances in play, to say someone let her down is casting judgment with out all the facts.

I'm quite comfortable with someone let her down.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion but to base it on a 6 paragraph news article seems silly to me.

Unless the story is grossly erroneous, I'm quite comfortable with someone let her down.

Where does it say in the article they ever lost sight of her. They did recall divers, usually you only do that if there is a problem, so by saying they didn't know where she was and didn't know she was having problems is a huge assumption on your part.

It is implied, though I'll grant you not absolutely clear, in:

The crew found her floating on the surface, not breathing, about 15 to 20 minutes later.

Somehow I rather doubt that they watched her drown for 15 to 20 minutes whilst waiting for the divers to surface.

Sorry Thall, I do agree with most things you say but this seems a little off base for me.

Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Luku]

Somehow I rather doubt that they watched her drown for 15 to 20 minutes whilst waiting for the divers to surface.

You assume she drown.

 

[Mike Boswell]

That is why I said seemingly. I would have to think that if she was in trouble and knew it she would have signaled for help or responded to efforts of the crew to ascertain if she was ok. But we do not even know if they did that. I again wonder why no one went in to assist her when she kept getting further and further away. I do hope we get the full story on this. And one other thing that occurs to me is where was her buddy? If she even had one to begin with.

I wondered that as well. The OP's report says she was diving with her husband, so I assumed he was her buddy. Here is a little bit more info: Surprise woman dies while diving in Florida Keys | Phoenix News | Arizona News | azfamily.com | Yahoo News

A real tragedy and so sad.

 

[Thalassamania]

You assume she drown.

A figure of speach for a death in the water, OK: Somehow I rather doubt that they watched her for 15 to 20 minutes whilst waiting for the divers to surface.

 

[bsee65]

If she was close enough to be seen while divers were reboarding, then one of those divers should have hopped right after her.