Panic is the natural consequence of an event which triggers it.Panic is a normal response to a real event. Panic was an inevitable consequence of her respiratory distress.
NO.
STRESS is a natural consequence of events.
Panic is what happens if the stress is not managed properly. If we're walking together and someone starts shooting at us, we're both exposed to stress. You can fail to manage it; panic, scream and run in circles, doing nothing to manage the situation, while my response would be to get down and assess my options for fighting back or withdrawing. It's going to quick, rapid, and may result in the same conclusion, escaping, but it was a conclusion arrived at by thought and rational decision making.
You can manage stress, or let it overwhelm you. Panic is when it overwhelms you and dictates your actions.
We have the amigdala for some good reasons and the fight or flight response is a normal occurrence and it helps us to stay alive (but if the root cause triggering the amigdala can't be fixed, we die like the deer).
However, respiratory distress is not like a bullet, which can't be rapidly overcome and fixed. Respiratory distress can be fixed; the process is simple if rational thought is maintained. Make a safe ascent, ditch weights, get positively buoyant. Keep regulator in.
Panic is NOT an inevitable consequence. It can be prevented, headed off, or even stopped once it presents. Once panic presents, a diver who does not manage it will miss one or more of the steps of overcoming respiratory distress, fight like mad, and lose. They drown; and while the respiratory distress may have been present, the panic remains the root cause because it was not properly managed, and it is what caused the drowning.
None of that produces cyanosis. You are talking B.S.
Your body is ready for fight or flight, adrenalin is released, you are oxygenated and an unstoppable force (not entirely though).
Respiratory distress and shock would instead produce cyanosis.
Right. HOWEVER, your body does not waste this oxygenated blood on trivial things like your skin and extremities. It concentrates that blood where it is needed most; in your brain (thinking and preserving life at all costs) Heart (keeping it beating at all costs), Lungs (preparing for maximum oxygen exchange), the big muscle groups (preparing them for long, sustained action; either running fast and long, or fighting hard), and the core (to prevent blood loss in the event of injury in the extremities.
Tissue without blood flow rapidly turns blue. Your blood is oxygenated, but not directed to the skin. Vasoconstriction has re-routed the flow. This is why doctors measure the oxygenation in the blood in the arteries, not using pulse-ox's. There are many situations they don't return an accurate reading.
You'd get the same result from a cold person. In response to hypothermia, your body redirects blood to the core, to retain warmth. You don't lose blood oxygenation, but you become cyanotic as the blood leaves the extremities. This is why your fingers and toes get cold first. And why alcohol makes you feel warm; it's a vasodilator, and dilates your blood vessels, directing blood back to your skin. You feel warm, but you lose heat even faster.
Your body has evolved its stress response for centuries. It's well aware of what it's doing. And a major part of this, blood flow redirection, can easily result in cyanotic skin.
I suggest you do some research before you call something BS when you don't know what you're talking about.
Heard that one too, and before you talk about horses and zebras, you have to know your taxonomy. From her description, she is at high risk not only for COPD but also lung cancer, diabetes, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease and hypertension, among other things. Your sister may be able to provide you with more information on this diver's potential medical issues.
No I am not saying there are only two approaches, it was a general statement (after all I am not writing a 5000 page technical book here, just speaking in general terms). I agree there are a number of approaches from totally strict to sickeningly soft.
I believe we're saying the same thing. On this we'll agree.
You state that one should engage adults as they are at the course because they chose to be, and I totally agree with this. Then you go on to say she will not listen and needs the big stick approach. This I disagree with. You try and change her whole thought process and thinking by a simple post here. It smacks of "I have spoken and you did not listen, so now I will beat you until you do" Metaphorically speaking.
I'm not trying a negative approach. That would have involved ridiculing her for what she did, attempting to humiliate her and attempting to gain a change in performance from shame. I have been careful to avoid that, specifically in trying to take out the stigma from panic.
TC, people are fighting you because you are using negative reinforcement, she isn't a soldier and is here because she wants to be. It's up to her if she wants to listen and no level of negative reinforcement is going to change her, just run her off and resolve nothing. Sounds to me like you have a little too much BS soldier left in you and are trying to apply it to the civilian world on an online forum of all places. I'm a vet and I wouldn't take an ounce of that BS on this side of the fence. Did she ask you to beat her down and rebuild her confidence, so why make it your NCO mission to do so? It's a bullish behavior that is becoming less and less acceptable in our society. It's up to her decide who to listen to and she has every right not to listen at all. Your tactics worked in the service because your soldiers had no choice. I have a saying for you, since you love metaphors so much, "You can lead a horse to water...", I'm sure you know the rest since you are so adept at using them to justify your bullish disposition.
I totally agree with the reasoning here when dealing with soldiers in the army. I understand you must break them and then rebuild them into people who will do as commanded no matter the consequence to them. There are a number of reasons why soldiers are made this way, some I totally agree with; reacting without hesitation to prevent a death of a comrade or ones self. Achieving a near impossible goal by willpower etc. I very much do appreciate the intent by your sergeant.
I think you both missed the point. It was not to break anyone; the point was you care about people by ensuring that you have done your best to teach them. This applies to everyone.
A dive instructor who does not teach their students all they can, and ensure the diver is prepared, has not shown a concern for that person. They've said that person does not matter to them to receive their best effort, that they don't care if they get hurt diving. You can do this best by challenging their skills and abilities, and imparting as much knowledge as they can. The actual topic does not matter. I'm not here to be her personal devil, but to see that these mistakes don't happen again.
I don't "break" anyone. I'm not a Drill Sergeant. I deal with professional Soldiers, and while I can be as hard as this in discussing the mistakes that another Soldier or leader has made, I do it without "breaking" them, without raising my voice, without rancor. It's a candid, professional discussion. The person and team being evaluated/reviewed is expected to point out the errors they made that are not readily apparent to an outside observer. But, frequently, they make mistakes they don't see, and often try to defend their choices. That's when the review becomes hard on them. It's not about coddling someone's ego (which is frequently deflated), but about showing them their mistakes, and letting them discover for themselves how they will fix or prevent that in the future.
I don't like the EIB, because it becomes a crutch for why the panic happened. Regardless of whether there was a medical event; the actions of dealing with it fell short of the goal of a calm, positively buoyant diver awaiting rescue. Having a medical event doesn't deal with what happened afterward; and can act as a cover for the shortcomings in training and problem solving.
We can't help one bit with a medical problem, and she's getting checked out. I don't believe anything more can be done with that issue. Take that out, though, and we still have the panic which revealed the shortcomings in training, problem-solving, and experience. Those we can help, once it is acknowledged that there are problems there. We've already dealt with the DM/buddy issue, and the weight belt. There are still some other issues to resolve as well.
The next would be the stress reaction. I agree with flots; a good Stress and Rescue class will allow Thea to learn and recognize the symptoms of stress, how to prevent it, and how to manage it.
It would be the best class that you’ve taken.
The next recommendation would be to seek out similar conditions as much as possible and dive in them; taking an incremental approach to expand your diving experience. Never go into an uncomfortable situation, but push the comfort zone as much as you feel you can handle. Most people can dive in calm and clear water. If you gain the experience to handle low-viz, current, surge, or other adverse conditions, you emerge as a more confident diver.
And finally, there’s a technique that involves thinking through most likely accident situations. You can start with your last dive. Start with the uncomfortable weight belt. What would you do NOW to handle that? I do this mental walkthrough of most stressful events that I can imagine. It worked well for me while deployed. It gives a starting point to reacting to a stressful event, a few automatic actions that help head off the stress, and give you breathing room to start solving the problem
