DM's/ instructors on vacation.

[fisheyeview]

At the risk of getting attacked for answering (it happened last time I joined one of these talks, and led to the attecker getting banned), here goes.

Like a lot of those who have already posted I do not hide my status per say. If asked, I am honest, but I don't usually go out of my way to announce it.

If I am asked to buddy with someone on a boat where I am just having fun then I will ask to be paid. Like a lot of others have said this usually fixes the problem. There are some exceptions to this rule. There are two local boats where if they ask I will help out. That is because I am friends with the owners, and they comp me trips when I help.

If I see a potential problem that I can help with I will offer my help. It does not matter if I am diving local, or on vacation. A couple of years ago my wife and I were in Curacao. During a dive I saw another diver (who I didn't know) whose tank had come out of his cam band. I handed my wife my camera, and helped get his tank back in place. Until I swam up to him he didn't even know it was out. I then went back to my dive with my wife.

It was a simple thing to do, but it might have prevented a worse problem.

Over an hour later my wife and I got back to shore at the end of the dive. The diver I had helped had waited to thank me. He was a new diver, and none of his buddies knew what to do. I did not expect this, but it made an impression on me. Here was someone with a lot of class and manors.

Now, here's what got me flamed before. If I am on a fun dive, I am shooting pictures. What really gets me is when a dive op tells some diver to follow me as I am a DM, but does not even let me know they are doing this. I end up with a buddy that I didn't even know was my buddy. This has happened to me before, and it really P.O.'s me. The "buddy" usually ends up messing up my shots, so I end up trying to lose them. I assume that they just want to see what I am shooting not knowing that they are "with" me.

If I am asked, and I agree, then I don't mind taking along other divers. But don't just assume, and leech them on to me without asking first.

 

[Thalassamania]

It seems to me that what is at issue here is: what circumstances constitute negligence. I realize that there are several different flavors of negligence, but I always thought that, in order for negligence to exist, several conditions must be met:
1. Duty - a recognized relationship (paying customer/student) exists between the victim and the professional
2. Breach - failure of the professional to exhibit behavior in accordance with his/her qualifying agency
3. Proximate cause - injury is reasonably connected to the actions (or inaction) of the professional

If no specific duty exists, e.g., the victim is not a student or paying customer of the professional, then the professional should be held to the same standard as any other OW certified diver (get medical help in the case of an emergency). This seems reasonable to me. Of course, regardless of whether true negligence occurred, any dive professional can be sued if he/she is involved in an incident. That's just the litigious nature of the society in which we live.

Analogous scenarios occur with off-duty medical professionals. How many physicians out there use their medical title in reserving a plane ticket?

If memory serves: Two certified lifeguards (not Pros, amateurs) went to the beach wearing their orange trunks with patches. Thought it cool and chick-bait. A man drowned in their vicinity and they failed to attempt to effect a rescue. They were successfully sued, the theory was that if they represent themselves as people who have a certain duty they take on that duty especially if they possess special training that enables them to fulfill that duty.

Bottom line, when on a strictly recreational dive, I do not wear emblems and such, patch jackets are for dive shows. I do sometimes have four reflective stripes on my snorkel.

When I do have to show a card I use something that the operator doesn't really know how the deal with, a University Research Diver card, a CMAS Three Star Scientific Diver Card, a NOAA Working Diver Card, a YMCA Environmental Scuba Diver card from 1980, a DSO letter, etc. None of these have ever been challenged or given me any problem ... with the exception of a PADI Five Star facility in the Keys that would not honor my CMAS Three Star Instructor Card for a rental for my son. An SSI shop a quarter mile up the road had no problem.

There has been a lot of discussion on this topic. Can a lawyer out there answer this: If you are a DM on a boat on vacation, someone gets injured and you do absolutely nothing to help him (of course, I would do something, as most people would), can you be SUCCESSFULLY sued? Is there a specific law saying one way or another?

I am not a lawyer, I do try and keep up on diving/legal stuff. As far as I know there has never been a successful suit in that situation. But the case I described above is sitting out there as a potential precedent.

Similar thread

 

[scarefaceDM]

lets beat this horse some more.

If you are in a position to aid someone in distress and it may involve you risking your life to save another are you morally obligated if you are TRAINED to do so. IE. a doctor, police office paramedic, Nurse, rescue worker, rescue diver, DM, Instructor etc...Someone more trained in life saving skills than the average Joe.

This does go without saying with regards to the original post question..do you hide your status while on vacation. For fear of law suits in the event of an accident. You should not fear what you can avoid. State whom you re what your intention is( on vacation) and if asked to WORK( pair up with someone you do not know and watch them while they go here there and where ever) then ask for compensation. Ask them to PAY for your liability insurance if anything happens. Even a small cut can lead to a major headache in the end. Askign for payment before hand clears the air quick and lets the Operator know he should be more prepared to deal with clients of all levels.

This can be beaten down and more....it is all in how you live with yourself if you refused to aid someone when you knew you could have done something.

Safe dives everyone.

 

[mikemill]

From what I've read and gathered from instructors I've talked to they aren't presenting their non-pro certs in an attempt to sherk legal or moral duty. They do it so they won't be bombarded with questions. Much in the same way other professionals (doctor, lawyer, banker, etc) won't say what their jobs are.

 

[CompuDude]

I'll buck the trend.

Many times I have been given extra perks and operated under relaxed rules by presenting my DM card. The crew often relaxes more around fellow professionals, subjects them to less scrutiny, lets them do their own thing where applicable, and often waives some of the BS hoops non-pros need jump through to get on with their diving. The DM's invite me to chat more, sometimes I get other free perks as well.

I've never been asked to insta-buddy with someone I thought was a problem. Although, I usually travel with a buddy, so this is seldom an issue. At any rate, I would balk and make it clear I was there as a passenger, with the intent of photography, so assigning me someone who needs supervision would be a poor choice on their part. And I'm perfectly willing to make that abundantly clear.

Take the good, reject the bad. That's just how I roll.

In an emergency situation where I could help, you're darned tootin' I would help any way I was qualified to. In a real emergency, no one is going to get to dive anymore anyway, so there's no real harm in doing so. To my viewpoint, at least. And has has been observed, in a major lawsuit, it's all going to come out anyway, so where's the good in hiding it?

 

[Jim Ernst]

You dive?

Nope, I just collect the cards!!

Hello Scott , How the heck are you Buddy.

 

[marinediva]

My experience in Aust, is very different to you CompuD....
If I am with a AOW student I offer my instructor card and discuss what I am doing with the dive leader. If I am there for my own pleasure and the operators are not aware of my Instructor card I offer my rescue card. I do not feel I am hiding anything. On the couple of occasions where I have produced my Instructor card and I just want to dive for pleasure I have found some funny reactions. It seemed as though the operators thought I may be spying on them to see how their operation worked. This has only happened on the GBR where the shops although seemingly friendly with each other are very competitive and I cannot help feeling some DM's are very intimidated especially when they are recently certified. This is not something I alone have had problems with as on one memorable occasions I witnessed the interaction between a leading DM and a pleasure diving Instructor and was appalled at the reception he received which in my opinion was unjustified. When I have been in PNG and Thailand I have not had that problem.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

If memory serves: Two certified lifeguards (not Pros, amateurs) went to the beach wearing their orange trunks with patches. Thought it cool and chick-bait. A man drowned in their vicinity and they failed to attempt to effect a rescue. They were successfully sued, the theory was that if they represent themselves as people who have a certain duty they take on that duty especially if they possess special training that enables them to fulfill that duty.

@Thalassamania: Do you have a reference for this legal case? If the incident occurred as you described, then I'm not sure your interpretation of the case outcome is correct. FYI, "duty to act" could apply in several different scenarios:
(a) when employment requires it
For instance, if your employer designates you as the OSHA-recognized first aid provider and you are called to an injury scene. Alternatively, certain jobs that involve a legal obligation to provide first aid care include: law enforcement officers, firefighters, park rangers, lifeguards, and flight attendants.
(b) when a pre-existing responsibility exists
This could apply to your OW students if you dive with them outside of class after they are certified.
(c) when "on-duty" (and sometimes when "off-duty")
In the U.S., this is dependent on the state in which the incident occurs. Some states stipulate that certain individuals trained to provide emergency care have a legal duty to provide care regardless of whether they are on- or off-duty. Other states require those individuals to act when on-duty, but generally not when off-duty...unless they are in uniform or wearing visible insignia and appear to be on-duty.
I think this is the real reason that the off-duty lifeguard chick magnets got into trouble. They appeared to be on-duty, and they were certified lifeguards. Practically speaking, had they made a good faith effort to get some real help, I bet they would have been in the clear...or at least the family of the victim would not have felt compelled to sue.

Here's my point, Thal: from the case you cited, you extrapolate that representing yourself as a dive instructor through clothing/patches establishes a duty to act. I do not believe that "dive instructor" is one of those jobs in which a person has a legal duty to act when off-duty. Lifeguards, firefighters, and policemen possibly...but probably not dive instructors. Perhaps it is state-dependent. If anyone has any other info on this, then I'm all ears.

This discussion makes me wonder if the various dive certification agencies are doing a good enough job teaching their DMs and instructors when they have a legal responsibility to act.

 

[Peter Guy]

I do have a moral and legal obligation to ensure that the boat operator isn't putting the passengers at risk IF I should notice anything.

In most jurisdictions in the US you do NOT have a "legal obligation" at all -- IF (big word, IF) you are merely another paying passenger on the boat.

The key to the basic question asked is "Does a professional, by virtue of being a professional, have a duty to ACT in a situation." Whether one has a duty to act is going to depend on:

a. The jurisdiction (laws are different); and
b. The basic facts of the case (Thal's example of the lifeguards who apparently were held to a duty to act BECAUSE they had OBJECTIVELY held themselves out to be lifegaurds).

I don't believe there can be a "bright line" answer to the basic question. Some jurisdictions may well have established a "duty to act" in some situations -- OR, given the facts of a situation, the Actor may have created a "duty to act" (re the question regarding the Instructor who lords his knowledge over everyone).

BUT ONCE YOU HAVE ACTED, whether or not you had a duty to so act, it is my belief you will be held to the standard of care of a professional with your training and expertise REGARDLESS of what card you showed.

 

[DennisH]

Hey folks, there seems to be substantial confusion as to the legal duty involved in various circumstances. I'll give you my take as a lawyer practicing in civil litigation for the past six years -- with two caveats: 1) my practice focuses mostly on aboriginal rights litigation; and 2) I am in Canada, where the common law has developed somewhat differently.

Walter, you asked about a scenario where one instructor is low key, while another instructor is aggressively asserting his expertise. This ties in with Thal's example of the two lifeguards in full "uniform" despite being off duty. Essentially, this comes down to one issue -- holding yourself out as an expert. When you hold yourself out as an expert, and someone relies on that expertise, you have created a duty of care. Now, any liability flowing from an accident would have to be related to the subject area you identified yourself having expertise in.

For example, you say "I am a dive instructor and let me tell you how to do a series of deep safety stops" to someone on the boat. If the person tries to do safety stops as you've described, instead of how they are trained to, and something goes wrong, then say hello to liability. But in the same example, let's say they ignore your advice, or do the stops as you've described and it goes fine -- but they have an unrelated problem or accident, you are unlikely to be held liable.

Hope that helps, cheers everyone.