Ginnie Springs diver missing - Florida
- Thread starter DandyDon
- Start date
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
We do allow freedoms, but we require respect. Your desire to post is limited by what's good for the community. You don't get to do cyber extortion or obvious libel here. In this case, the individual made a statement that the instructor didn't have the right to cease an attempted rescue of the deceased on Facebook. We've deleted less problematic statements for a variety of reasons.
On the other hand, I've been sued to take down first-hand reports of accidents and have not done so. It wasn't fun and I've learned how to protect myself. If I am threatened with such a suit, I often post the threat for all to read. I usually receive another threat to take down their threat or else, and I will post those as well. If you're going to threaten me, I'm going to let the entire Scuba world know what you're doing.
EFX
Contributor
Yes, it's a horrible, useless rule and any instructor who gives their students such rules are doing a disservice to their students. Unless you include reasons why one should not go into an overhead environment students may feel their freedom is being unfairly restricted, and some may have a tendency to say "screw it", I'm going in. Let me rephrase the rule to make it more useful. "Never go into an overhead environment without the proper training and equipment.“ In my PADI OW course book there was at least one page listing the dangers of overhead environments. They stressed the importance of diving to your level of training.
I appreciate how things are handled here. I've not always said that in the past, but have seen the ways and changed my mind. As you can see the other post on cdf about this incident devolved into a s--t show of egos which is typical when cave divers are involved. It's very sad really. I think because information was released quickly without naming names, it's led to more civil discussion than usual. It's funny that the other forum's threads didn't go downhill until I asked the mods to take it down as I was requested to do. The mods reposted it because they thought it was an important post and I think they hoped putting it back up would stop some of the bickering.
I used to do a lot of rock climbing and mountaineering (in addition to diving) when I was in my 20s/30s. In both sports, it helps to analyze and learn from accidents.
In North America, the American Alpine Club publishes an annual book titled Accidents in North America Climbing.
AAC Publications
(From memory, it used to be titled Accidents in North America Mountaineering)
I used to buy that book every year and analyze all the accidents to see what I could learn. I wonder if something similar exists in our community? If it doesn't, maybe it should?
- brett
In North America, the American Alpine Club publishes an annual book titled Accidents in North America Climbing.
AAC Publications
(From memory, it used to be titled Accidents in North America Mountaineering)
I used to buy that book every year and analyze all the accidents to see what I could learn. I wonder if something similar exists in our community? If it doesn't, maybe it should?
- brett
Yeah.
Even if they’re *all* heart attacks, there’s still things to learn. Like maybe a medical exam should be involved at some point... Pilots have to have regular medical clearance... Even drivers licenses require periodic eye exams...
Root cause analysis and human factor analysis are never wasted. Even if it’s the same as the last few times, it tells you that what you’re doing right now is not working, and gives you the evidence to push needed change.
Of course, those with a vested interest in the status quo (or even simply a resistance to change) won’t want that...
ETA: Or it might show that things, while are not perfect, are good *enough* to not warrant significant changes. But without the analysis, how do you actually know?
And this is why I am so grateful that Gareth Lock is out there pushing some really useful and progressive ideas.
Once upon a time it was all well and good to say, "It was human error," or "It was a medical incident," or "They should have known better."
But we're beyond that now. We have the tools to explore deeper and, perhaps, build an even stronger, safer foundation having done so.
They've announced the memorial on Facebook, Friday 10am at Ginnie.
Well, my sister has a doctor's appointment, so I won't make it.
Similar threads
