How to proceed with conflicting dive buddy?

[Bob DBF]

and if they die while you were on the boat do you think they'd let you off-that you abandoned your buddy, at least thats how they'd perceive it

First of all, figure out who abandoned who, luckily the OP had the gas to track his buddy down, with rec divers going back to a mooring ball, most dont.
.

As far as procedures go, one should explain the details of the incident of a lost buddy to the skipper once back on the boat. Since it was after the planned turnpoint (I am not as conservative as the OP) I would take a quick look around and finish the plan.

My buddy was found down current, out of sight with no SMB, from the information I gave the skipper. I assume the boy got a good chewing out because he was in a closed wheelhouse with the skipper for awhile. I never talked or dove with him again, and I hope he learned something.

 

[EFX]

I don't want to re-hash things I already posted, but just to provide a brief example, the prosecutor expected the diver to endanger himself to surface, just in case his buddy MIGHT be on the surface, and MIGHT need assistance ... despite the fact that he didn't know if his buddy was on the surface or needed assistance.

Despite the fact that the article may have been written by someone not familiar with diving and its possible hazards, I didn't think he was guilty of neglect. What's puzzling to me is why did he have to make an emergency ascent, unless that meant skipping a safety or deco stop. Skipping a deco stop would have endangered him as you suggest or exposed him to a possible gas embolism.

I took a cavern class from a well qualified cave instructor and he posed the following hypothetical question: "If you and your buddy were inside a cave and your buddy lost most of his gas and you absolutely knew that you didn't have enough gas for the two of you to exit the cave safely, what would you do? His answer: "You leave your buddy to die and exit the cave." What an awful, awful decision to have to make but his explanation was, it's better to have one fatality than two.

The lesson is you help your buddy as much as possible, according to your training, without risking your life in the process.

 

[Bob DBF]

Wrong thread.

 

[SlugLife]

I’d like to remind everyone that reporters are notoriously lousy writing about dive accidents. It’s quite possible there’s something the court was presented with that didn’t make it into the article.

Correct, but not very applicable here.

One of the article I read, is essentially an interview with the prosecutor. What the prosecutor said was absolute nonsense. I replied somewhat directly to that article in this comment in another thread. If those statements were the things the prosecutor used to secure the conviction, then it's not a case of a lousy article. It's the case of a lousy and immoral prosecutor who fraudulently fabricated nonsense about the dive-industry and dive-buddies.

What's puzzling to me is why did he have to make an emergency ascent, unless that meant skipping a safety or deco stop.

Right. From that diver's perspective, all he really knew is his buddy had buoyancy issues and they could no longer see their buddy. They didn't know if their buddy was on the surface, nor if they needed help. All he knew is "I can't see my dive-buddy." Also keep in mind his buddy was a dive-instructor. If I was diving with a dive-instructor; my first assumption would be that they could take care of themselves and probably swam off looking at fishes. Not that they had an emergency, which only I could help them with.

His answer: "You leave your buddy to die and exit the cave."

Precisely. And an important thing to consider BEFORE you end up in that situation. Also a good reason to follow rule-of-thirds at a minimum in cave-diving.

The lesson is you help your buddy as much as possible, according to your training, without risking your life in the process.

Standard curriculum for Rescue Diver courses, is to teach you to never endanger yourself to rescue another diver. I don't know if it's standard-curriculum for Open Water, but I learned that from my OW instructor.

 

[covediver]

the briefing before a scienfic dive states "any diver can call the dive for any reason at any time" and we are required to surface as a team. Perhaps that is the starting point.

 

[Searcaigh]

I posted this in another thread

Accident Analysis: Christine Gauci Fatality | Malta 2020

- by Andy Davis - Assessing critical learning points to help promote increased dive safety. In January 2020, Christine Gauci, a 35-year old technical diver tragically perished in a scuba diving accident in Malta.

scubatechphilippines.com

 

[Beau Holden]

I posted this in another thread

Accident Analysis: Christine Gauci Fatality | Malta 2020

- by Andy Davis - Assessing critical learning points to help promote increased dive safety. In January 2020, Christine Gauci, a 35-year old technical diver tragically perished in a scuba diving accident in Malta.

scubatechphilippines.com

Very good read. Thanks for posting.

 

[PR_SMITH]

Diving buddy found guilty of AFM soldier's death in 2020 Gozo tragedy

Christine Gauci, 35, had died in the limits of Sannat

timesofmalta.com

Anyone else notice the last line of the story:

"Inspector Josef Gauci prosecuted."

Any relation to the diver?

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

When it comes to technical diving (for me CC), I would have not entered the water with someone impaired. Not just for their sake (as an impaired buddy with an emergency is going to be harder to help), but also my own. My logic is that if I have an issue where I need help, an impaired buddy is unlikely to assist.

For recreational diving (OC), the risks are significantly less, but I think I'd still say no. An impaired buddy is an accident waiting to happen. Under the surface is not the place to test how poorly they can manage themselves. Even though the level of stress always exists in diving, being impaired is recipe for disaster.

 

[Big_Orange]

Abort the dive, be smart, dive smart