DSD Fatality suit. Brooks v. PADI

[JackD342]

Yes, and I thought the instructor was supposed to be monitoring all his divers, all the time, which would make everybody up mandatory.


Bob

Yep. During OW training dives too. If I have a small group and no DM, everyone goes up on each CESA and on each alternate air source ascent. No one left behind either above or below.

 

[Neilwood]

They described that as a binary choice, for the instructor to stay down with one pair, or surface with the other pair. No mention of the EVERYBODY up option, which is the obvious choice.

Agreed - if an instructor is responsible for 4 divers, then they should all perform as a group of 4. If one goes up, everyone goes up.

Another particular note on that case was it was one adult and two boy scouts (not sure of ages) - IMHO that increases the risk dramatically compared to three adults. The instructor should have taken that into account

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Agreed - if an instructor is responsible for 4 divers, then they should all perform as a group of 4. If one goes up, everyone goes up.

Another particular note on that case was it was one adult and two boy scouts (not sure of ages) - IMHO that increases the risk dramatically compared to three adults. The instructor should have taken that into account

The instructor should, however, it would be helpful if agencies set specific guidelines for reduction, but doing so places more of the liability on the agency and dive shop. Instructors take a huge liability risk for very little reward. Those that work for shops often have to disregard safety if they want to keep their jobs and hope for the best. That's one of the contributors to high liability costs: unsafe practices that are so common in the industry.

 

[Neilwood]

The instructor should, however, it would be helpful if agencies set specific guidelines for reduction, but doing so places more of the liability on the agency and dive shop. Instructors take a huge liability risk for very little reward. Those that work for shops often have to disregard safety if they want to keep their jobs and hope for the best. That's one of the contributors to high liability costs: unsafe practices that are so common in the industry.

Agreed - I am basing my observation on ideal world circumstances as opposed to the reality of minimal reward for the instructor.

 

[rjack321]

The plaintiffs’ attorney in this case may not be a diver, but he is a very experienced Maritime law specialist.

I don't necessarily 100% agree with his reasoning but I enjoyed his writing and I look forward to hearing how the admiralty jurisdiction is decided.

Personally I don't think DSDs should exist and continued PADI's defense of them (in open water no less) smacks of money grubbing at the expense of safety.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Personally I don't think DSDs should exist and continued PADI's defense of them (in open water no less) smacks of money grubbing at the expense of safety.

I sort of agree with you and sort of don't. DSDs/Try Scuba with 4:1 ratios and not having confined water training prior should definitely go. When I did my first scuba experience in 2000, a DSD on Maui, a pool session was required, and that eliminated a number of people. We had to do a number of skills. We then waded into the ocean, went down to about 30 feet. I don't remember the ratio, probably 4:1. Now as an instructor, I think that is way too high. But I do see value/importance of a pool session. When I open my dive shop in Greece, I'll offer Try Scuba sessions, but it will be at 1:2 or 1:1, in protected, shallow coves with pool like conditions.

 

[JackD342]

"

I don't necessarily 100% agree with his reasoning but I enjoyed his writing and I look forward to hearing how the admiralty jurisdiction is decided.

Personally I don't think DSDs should exist and continued PADI's defense of them (in open water no less) smacks of money grubbing at the expense of safety.

"Resort" dives are NOT an exclusively PADI offering. Introductory Scuba Experience has been part of the RSTC since at least 2001.

 

[Louisville Diver]

Personally I don't think DSDs should exist and continued PADI's defense of them (in open water no less) smacks of money grubbing at the expense of safety.

I agree - every time I go somewhere like a Sandals and see the guys from the shop recruiting DSDs around the pool, I have to wince. All I can think about is the amount of liability and the difficulty posed in trying to control a panicky, untrained, novice diver at 30 feet, particularly if you're not 1:1 or 1:2.

 

[rjack321]

"

"Resort" dives are NOT an exclusively PADI offering. Introductory Scuba Experience has been part of the RSTC since at least 2001.

I know they aren't just a PADI thing
I just happen to see or be aware of quite a few DSD lawsuits which include PADI. They seem to be on the defensive about resort/DSD courses more than other agencies, but I have no data to support that just my perception

 

[tursiops]

I know they aren't just a PADI thing
I just happen to see or be aware of quite a few DSD lawsuits which include PADI. They seem to be on the defensive about resort/DSD courses more than other agencies, but I have no data to support that just my perception

Your perception is probably right, but probably only because there are lot more PADI sites and thus a lot more PADI DSDs than other agencies, especially in the third world.