diving at age 10 ?

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

To all those who contributed to the thread above, I extend my warmest thanks.

This being my very first experience at participating in a forum, I must say I am impressed by the rich and diverse feedback I received as a result of a rather simple question (albeit with a few more complex side-aspects, I'll agree ;-)

A special thanks to "Genesis" and "DennisW" for agreeing with me on the fact that kids age 10 do a whole lot of very dangerous stuff without requiring anybody's certification or OK (not to mention later stages such as teenage drunk-driving and more...). Of course we should protect them when we can, but when my 10 year old climbs up a tree, I'm sitting in my wheelchair at the bottom, and if I do sometimes try and provide timely advice, to hell if I'm going to forbid him from climbing just because he could fall...

As for the legal issues, as very well set out by "Northeastwrecks" (thanks, its good to discuss facts), I can't but agree, and at the same time rejoice that I live in a country where lawsuits are not as frequent as the US... although here again I grant to you that if one of my kids got hurt or died while 'buddy-breathing' with me I don't doubt I would be fully liable under any legal system !

By the way, I wish this could qualify as a "Happy End", but I guess it won't --not for all of us, obviously-- my kids are both currently taking a PADI course with a very strict and capable instructor, and provided they succeed in obtaining certification will be diving with me -and additional diving buddies as appropriate- soon:)

Philip


if turtles can dive, then I can too
 
Putting all differences aside, I'm glad to hear you are getting training for them before putting them on SCUBA again. Congratulations on learning from your mistakes.
 
Walter once bubbled...
Putting all differences aside, I'm glad to hear you are getting training for them before putting them on SCUBA again. Congratulations on learning from your mistakes.

PGL,

Glad to hear that the kids are entering the world of scuba. As you know, its a truly wonderful activity. Will they be diving in Lake Geneva? If so, what's it like?

FWIW, I agree with you that kids must be allowed to take risks. I would not suggest otherwise. Its just a question of how to minimize the risks while allowing the child to have fun.

Finally, welcome to the board.
 
Looks like I missed a heated discussion whilst away on a dive trip.

In any event, I believe that you might find this article which I wrote for the Sep '01 issue of Undercurrent http://www.undercurrent.org/ entitled "The Minds & Bodies of Children," informative:

"Make no mistake. More children at increasingly younger ages are going scuba diving. Many diving parents want their children to experience the colors, creatures, calm and curiosity of the underwa t e r world. And, the dive industry wants to expand the market. By marketing diving to families and certifying children, the entire industry — the training agencies, the manufacturers, dive stores, and dive travel — benefits economically.

With an eye toward promoting the sport, in 1999 the Recreational Scuba Tr a i n i n g Council, a standard- setting body whose membership is composed of training agencies, eliminated its recommended age of 15 for junior certification. No longer fettered by minimum age limits, several major training agencies lowered the age for extended dive experiences and conditional certifications. For example, today PA D I ’s “Seal Team” and SSI’s “Scuba Rangers” offer scuba experiences to children as young as age 8, and junior open water certification at age 10.

Despite the undeniable appeal of introducing youngsters to the underwater world and making scuba a family activity, several psychological and physiological reasons demand consideration in opening scuba to 8-year-olds.

To understand the psychological and physiological concerns requires recognizing the age varation at which children make the cognitive, behavioral and physical transition from one developmental stage to the next. In fact, this well-known variability itself forms a basis for questioning the policy of lowering ages.

Cognitive Issues:

Among cognitive concerns is the child’s ability to acquire and manipulate information. According to Jean Piaget’s widely influential system, three developmental periods are germane to child scuba divers.

The first, the Pre-Operational stage, begins about age 2 and extends to about age 7. In the later years, a child has an intuitive though rudimentary grasp of some logical concepts. A child’s perceptions still dominate his judgment. He will tend to focus attention on one aspect of an object while ignoring others. He is unable to understand the principles underlying proper behavior, relying on the do’s and don’t s imposed by authority. While it is uncommon, some children 8 and older are delayed in the Pre-Operational stage and the dive agencies have no explicit criteria for screening them out. But, a late-developing child could forget to continue to exhale while making an emergency ascent or may not place anothers’ safety on par with his own. It is up to the instructor (who could himself be a teenager of 18) to recognize cognitive immaturity and refuse to teach the child.

During the next, or Concrete Operational stage (covering approximately age 7-11 years), logical thought develops. But it remains dependent upon concrete referents. While the child is developing the ability to appreciate concepts such as length, mass and volume, and to arrange objects in a logical sequence, it
remains linked to objects present — not objects in the abstract. One can assume that the child at age 11 is much more capable than the child at age 8 in this stage.

The new policy for PADI, SSI and others clearly allows children in the Concrete Operational stage (7-11 years) to enroll in scuba programs. The potential risks are not inconsequential. For example, a child in this period may be able to understand basic scuba theories such as Boyle’s law and solve a few problems. However, he will be unable to hypothesize from such principles and extend them to a wider application — such as appreciating that an empty tank may allow for a few more breaths as one ascends. More worrisome, when faced with a scuba emergency, such as a BC inflator mechanism stuck in the open position, they will unlikely be able to generate multiple solutions to the situation. And, they would unlikely be able to select the best alternative: attempting to vent the BC continuously rather than disconnecting the inflator hose.

In the final stage of Formal Operations (covering approximately age 11-15 years), thought gradually becomes less tied to concrete reality and becomes more abstract. The ability to generate abstract propositions and multiple hypotheses and assess their possible outcomes becomes evident. This development allows individuals to think about what might be, rather than just what is. The levels of cognitive ability evident when a child completes this stage are those most appropriate to safe scuba.

Behavioral Issues:

Children are notorious for being exuberant, impulsive and feeling invincible. These are normal childhood traits that typically aren’t mastered until the mid to late teens, or even later. This has obvious implications for the appreciation and avoidance of risk — and the ability to act as a responsible dive buddy.

Physical Issues:

Patent foramen ovale (PFO): During fetal development, blood flows through a small opening between the right and left upper chambers of the heart. The lungs are inoperative and the mother oxygenates blood. At birth, however, this opening is supposed to close, shunting blood to the now-functioning lungs. While this “hole in the heart” usually seals by the third month of life, it does not always. Estimates of incomplete closures in older children and younger teens run higher than 50 percent in certain groups. Whatever the exact figures, the research suggests an increased incidence of PFO as age decreases below 20.

Without complete closure, blood can flow from the right to the left side of the heart without passing through the lungs. Increases in right chamber pressure that occur with common equalization techniques like the Valsalva maneuver — squeezing your nose, closing your mouth, and blowing — can move blood through the hole and bypass the lungs. When this happens, nitrogen bubbles that can form in the bloodstream may pass directly into the arteries and not be filtered by the lungs. This of course can lead to an embolism or DCS.

Possible retardation of bone growth: Long bones, like the humerus and femur, mature from growth plates, the active ends of bones where increases in length occur. The last of the growth plates generally do not cease activity until the late teens or early twenties. As these growth plates depend upon nearby blood vessels for oxygen and nutrition, physicians have long been concerned that nitrogen bubbles in the bloodstream may result in damage to these critical tissues. In addition, the development of bone and connective tissue involves molecular oxygen, raising the possible adverse effects of the elevation of oxygen partial pressures occurring during diving.

Heat regulation: Due to a relatively large skin mass to body mass ratio, children do not regulate body heat as well as adults. Until the mid-teens or so, youth are far more vulnerable to hypothermia. And, alarmingly, a child may be hypothermic yet have no complaints, and still feel warm to the touch.

Eustachian tube development: In younger children, the Eustachian tube is narrower and more horizontal than later in development. While this is unlikely to be problematic in children over age 12, it has implications for equalizing, including potentially damaging reverse squeeze, for children closer to age 8.

Furthermore, young divers with immature Eustachian tubes may be subject to more frequent middle ear infections. Since a diver must be able to clear his ears safely and comfortably, a person with a middle ear infection should not dive. So, a child must recognize it, tell someone, and not dive.

The Response of the Dive Training Community

The positions of several agencies are based on conclusions expressed by John Kinsella, Director, Training and Quality Management of PADI America, in his article entitled “Kids and Diving” (The PADI Undersea Journal — First Quarter, 2001).

After reviewing the evidence for potential medical concerns expressed by DAN, he concluded: “There is insufficient information available to make any evidence-based medical judgment for or against children in scuba diving.”

SSI allows children as young as age 8 to have a shallow water scuba experience in their “Scuba Rangers” program. Children 10 to 12 may receive a junior open water certification with certain limitations. Once they turn 12, they may upgrade to a regular open water diver. Those 12 and older are eligible to become a Nitrox specialty diver.

When we asked Dennis M. Pulley, SSI Director of Training , about their program, he told us that “SSI is aware of medical and psychological concerns in divers as young as 12.” However, he cited the RSTC position that medical experts are unable to provide any documentation or proof why an individual must be at least 12 years of age to begin scuba training.

Pulley also remarked that, “Psychologically, one could argue that many young males between the ages of 16 and 30 could have the same attitude of being invincible.”

It is true that many theoretical medical and behavioral concerns have not been subjected to controlled studies on humans. And may never. The ethical issues are obvious. For those issues that may be studied, it will be a long and painstaking process, as evidenced by how difficult gathering useful data on DCS has been.

It seems, then, to drop the training age with no longitudinal, hard data about the effect on children is questionable at best.

Historically, the response of training agencies to incomplete knowledge has been to err on the side of safety.

Think about how the agencies have treated dive tables for all gases, how they fought against Nitrox because it was unsafe and unstudied, how conservative they have been on dive-to-fly estimations, depth limits, and clearance to dive for medical disorders that may pose a risk to scuba divers. Yet the leadership in this conservative industry has taken a “relaxed” attitude regarding the diving safety of children.

However, while there may be no formal studies of the effect of diving on children, PADI and European-based CMAS have long offered swimming pool scuba to children as young as age 4, and restricted open water certification for those to age 8. To date, the results cause no alarm. Even allowing for the extent to which good PR may influence disclosure of adverse events, if children were sustaining harm in significant numbers, liability issues would presumably force this information into the open.

To their credit, PADI and SSI have taken sensible steps to address medical and developmental concerns.

For example, the Seal Team, Bubblemaker and Scuba Rangers programs are restricted to a pool or pool-like environment. Both agencies require that certified divers ages 10-11 be accompanied by a certified parent, legal guardian, or professional dive leader, and limit maximum depth to 40 feet. We should note, however, that while these depth limits do control the partial pressures of nitrogen and oxygen, an embolism can occur in as little as four feet of water.

PADI has taken special educational efforts to alert instructors to the safety issues. And while current instructors haven’t been trained to certify children but still can, future instructors will find extensive material incorporated into upcoming revised Instructor Development Courses.

Nonetheless, not all agencies have been willing to embrace scuba experiences for kids.

Neither NAUI nor the YMCA — both nonprofit organizations in contrast with PADI and SSI — offer scuba programs for children less than 12 years of age.

Frank Toal, of the NAUI training office, told Undercurrent that the agency found the medical and developmental concerns sufficiently compelling to preclude consideration of scuba for those less than age 12. Additionally, NAUI’s junior scuba certification, for ages 12-14, imposes a 60-foot maximum depth limit and requires supervision by a certified diver age 18 or older.

Such reservations are not limited to these two training agencies and several experts have been outspoken in their opposition, most notably Larry “Harris” Taylor, Ph.D., a biochemist and Diving Safety Coordinator at the University of Michigan. His somewhat intemperate thoughts on the topic can be found at DiveGeek.

World-recognized dive medicine expert Dr. Ernest Campbell has expressed misgivings about allowing his children to be certified at a young age, and said that he probably would have waited until their midteens if he had it to do again.

So, what’s a parent to do?

Admittedly the issues are complex. Yet it is clear, children face greater risks than adults. Parents or guardians must be thorough and responsible when considering whether to enroll in a PADI or SSI program. Any child being considered for a compressed air at depth experience or scuba certification should receive a pediatric examination with the expressed purpose of clearance for diving. The child’s psychological maturity for diving should be evaluated through open and honest discussions between the child, parent or guardian, and a knowledgeable instructor.

If any party has substantial reservations, wait until these resolve. Under no circumstances should an unwilling child be coerced into scuba. If all signs are go, make sure the youngster has gear he or she can manage, wears adequate thermal protection, and is enrolled in a class of similar aged children.

Finally, for those children receiving certifications with restrictions, ensure that all conditions are scrupulously observed. Attend the classes with your child and if you have any doubts about the child, the instructor, or the class, work them out or consider other classes later.—Doc Vikingo"

Best regards.

DocVikingo
 
Thanks for an excellent write up.
 
I appreciate the kind words.

Thanks,

DocVikingo
 
the voice of reason.

There are indeed risks involved in this activity for kids. Nobody has said otherwise.

However, there are risks for many activities - if not all - that kids undertake. I take my daughter offshore fishing with me. Could she be injured or worse out there? Sure. Am I "irresponsible" doing so? No. No more than you are if you let your kid play little league or soccer - sports where kids are regularly, even seriously injured.

For that matter, riding a bicycle is dangerous.

A friend of mine's daughter severely injured one of her ankles playing soccer. That injury will be with her pemanently, according to the orthopedic specialists she's talked to. It could have been significantly worse, according to them too - including possible permanent REAL disability. Yet nobody suggests that she, who had played competitively from age 5 until this happened, was being "maltreated" or her parents were "negligent" as a consequence.

There was a kid near here who died playing football last year.

The issue is, at the end of the day, one of risk:benefit analysis, and an individual analysis of a kid's maturity. Benchmarks are interesting, but not terribly informative, because they deal with statistical averages and, as any one who is actually a parent will tell you, no kid is "average" in any meaningful respect.

I had two "kids" - both 15 - in my OW class. One was reasonably attentitive and competent, and IMHO was fine to train. The other was IMHO more risky to train than my daughter (who is SIX!) would be to train today - simply due to his behavior and attitude.

I have no idea if either or both continued diving after the class. Neither was there because someone else wanted them to be - both were there because THEY wanted to be.

There was also a father and son team in that same class - I don't know the kid's age, but my best guess was 14 or 15. He was fine - attentive and at least as sharp as the adults.

My objection is and has been with people running around making statements about criminal conduct. IMHO that is irresponsible and intentionally inflammatory without cause at best.
 
Genesis,

I think you missed the point. There is certainly an issue of risk and an issue of possible increased risk when children are diving. That, however, was not the issue over which people got fired up. The fact that children were involved probably increased the emotions, but the basic issue would have remained the same had it been adults instead of children.

The issue is simply no one, other than certified SCUBA instructors, should ever assist any non certified people to dive. There is too great a risk of killing the non certified person.
 
First, "certification" as an instructor does not certify competence. Is that not the entire point of all the endless debates over the various RTSC-aligned agencies and "drooping expectations"? (Some would say "dog-dead expectations"! :) )

In fact, all "certification" to instruct appears to actually certify is that someone has liability insurance so if you sue them they've got someone to hide behind! In some ways that could actually be bad - if you're the one injured and the one doing the instructing has significant assets!

The general premise here is that nobody other than someone with a "badge" (or card - call it what you will) can teach you something about diving.

That premise is clearly false.

In fact, I have learned more about diving from actually doing it with other people who are more skilled than I, "just doing it", and contemplating various aspects of diving than I have learned from anyone with a "badge" or "card".

This should not surprise, and I'm willing to bet its no different for anyone who actually dives! :)

What the "card" gives you is a shield from lawsuits (ok, from SUCCESSFUL lawsuits!) and an air of legitimacy when something goes wrong.

Let's face it - anyone who actually does dive knows the first and foremost rule - never hold your breath. Is it hard to communicate that? No. Is an instructor in the water with six students more likely to be able to stop someone who does the "spit, hold and shoot up" routine than a one-on-one situation with someone you know and trust - not someone you hired? No.

Can you die learning to dive? Yes. Is the "lawsuit insurance" worth something? Yes. Is the card worth something? Absolutely - you'll have trouble renting gear or getting tanks filled without it.

Does any of the above guarantee no problems? Absolutely NOT!

While I understand the general rubric of "keeping it in the family" of "certified instructors", this board is FILLED with horror stories about poor instructors and their progeny in the water.

Let's look at this honestly, instead of parroting agency lines which we have already shown through the dialogue here are at best misleading.
 
Genesis,

Bottom line - most instructors are incompetent - IMHO. Earlier in this thread, I said, "Unfortunately, proper instruction is the exception, rather than the rule."

OTOH, if you just take divers who are not certified instructors, the percentage who are incompetent to teach diving approaches 100%.

Most dive instructors didn't become incompetent when they got their instructor card, they were already incompetent. A few actually learned to be competent.

"The general premise here is that nobody other than someone with a "badge" (or card - call it what you will) can teach you something about diving."

Of course it's false and I have not seen anyone say otherwise. To learn to dive (and for an introduction to diving) a person should go to a competent instructor. There are ways to separate the competent from the incompetent. After that introduction, (and even during the course) a diver should learn from other divers, instructors or not. One system which works quite well is that of mentoring. A mentor does not have to be an instructor.

"Let's face it - anyone who actually does dive knows the first and foremost rule - never hold your breath. Is it hard to communicate that? No."

I agree. OTOH, I've talked to lots of people who've tried SCUBA before getting certified. A friend or relative loaned them gear. When I question them, it is rare that such a warning was issued. It is rare that the friend or relative was close enough to prevent them from bolting. I've never heard from anyone who was introduced to diving by a friend or relative who established signals to remind them not to hold their breath or who introduced SCUBA in a nonthreatening manner.

Is it possible for an OW or AOW or even a rescue certified diver to introduce SCUBA in a safe manner? Yes. Is it likely? No.

I do think a jury would believe a diver (who should know better) who allows a non certified person to use their gear or breath from their octopus was being negligent. I would agree with that jury.

Do you believe it is a good idea for divers, who are not instructors, to loan gear to non divers or to let them breathe off their octopus?
 

Back
Top Bottom