Instructor sentenced after diver's death

[Schwob]

And:
"
....

Hi all,

I don't even recommend getting a Rescue Cert as an avocational diver.

I have been on cross exam, I have done interrogatories, I have done depositions, I was the fool who represented himself in courts of law (and won).

Here is a scenario: A plaintiff's attorney announces to the court that, Mr. Mark, you are a "licensed rescue diver"; therefore, you should have used your skills to save this panicking diver who was just 25' behind you, even though she was not your buddy!

No way. Only a fool would get a rescue cert, a DM cert, or instructor cert as a part time diver. A full time instructor is a different story. Go all in, or don't go at all.

The rescue cert needs a new name.

thanks,
markm

Too late for me, but certainly food for thought in there...

 

[Marie13]

Little late for me on Rescue...IMO, the only reason to get DM is if you want to teach. You couldn't pay me to do that.

 

[markmud]

Little late for me on Rescue...IMO, the only reason to get DM is if you want to teach. You couldn't pay me to do that.

Hi Marie,

I agree with you. This is an avocation for me.

Back to topic,

I think the judge's sentence was correct. I don't think the DM/instructor should go to jail for being a fool and panic prone.

I also think the decedent was almost 100% culpable in his own death.

Don't get on a horse unless you want to take responsibility for what a 1,000 to 1,500 lb horse does to you.

Don't waterski behind a 400 horsepower boat, knowing that you can't communicate with the driver. While waterskiing I always keep my head on a swivel. I take care of myself.

Don't scuba dive with people who claim to be responsible for you while you are under water.

You are responsible for yourself. DON'T TOUCH MY SHI_!

markm

 

[drrich2]

I don't even recommend getting a Rescue Cert as an avocational diver.

I've seen Rescue Diver advocated pretty often on Scuba Board, and in times past it was one of the most consistently endorsed scuba training courses. I took it years ago & found it valuable, mainly because it taught a kind of global mindfulness and the need to stop, think, act & fight the instinctive 'freak out & react' or 'fight or flight' response to some underwater problems.

I don't want to see people shy away from that because I think it makes more mindful, mature divers. This has nothing directly to do with becoming a 'lifeguard diver' constantly on call to intervene and rescue other divers in crises (not that that's bad, if it's something you're willing & wired to do).

I sometimes wonder how many people long thereafter retain much in the way of 'rescue competence,' particularly a good recall of various methods of hauling someone out of the water.

Perhaps a name change would indeed be a good idea.

Richard.

 

[markmud]

I've seen Rescue Diver advocated pretty often on Scuba Board, and in times past it was one of the most consistently endorsed scuba training courses. I took it years ago & found it valuable, mainly because it taught a kind of global mindfulness and the need to stop, think, act & fight the instinctive 'freak out & react' or 'fight or flight' response to some underwater problems.

I don't want to see people shy away from that because I think it makes more mindful, mature divers. This has nothing directly to do with becoming a 'lifeguard diver' constantly on call to intervene and rescue other divers in crises (not that that's bad, if it's something you're willing & wired to do).

I sometimes wonder how many people long thereafter retain much in the way of 'rescue competence,' particularly a good recall of various methods of hauling someone out of the water.

Perhaps a name change would indeed be a good idea.

Richard.

Hi Richard,

As we mature and learn that we live in a litigious society, and that the legal system is not about fairness, I think you are correct. It is time for rescue and master scuba diver to take on new names.

thanks,
markm

 

[Bierstadt]

Sorry Dan_T,

The correct answer is POOR TRAINING!

As Oldschool wrote:
"So it's gotten to the point that We have people with dive master/ Instructors cards not knowing how to look after divers they are being payed to look after, And divers with OW/AOW cards not knowing how to look after themselves... As far as I can see from reading ... None of them should have been in anything but a 4 foot indoor pool... Being retrained as Bubble makers..."

Oldschool has it about right!

markm

No, not at all. I find it amusing that the same divers who hold the opinion that 'diving should be looked at as it really is, no rose-colored glasses, an inherently dangerous activity that must be deeply respected and undertaken with an abundance of safety, caution, training, and preparation' are also sometimes the same divers who eschew the reality of the training agency model vs the ideal of not letting novices out into the wild until they are a well-trained master of diving. I say this as someone who would prefer this ideal, but understands this is not the reality of the sport.

The reality is that novices are trained just enough to get them started in the assumption that these new divers will remain within the protective embrace of the professional training agency they began with. To be a part of this system professionally means accepting this premise, the working paradigm that means accepting responsibility for the safety of your captive agency-trained divers. I do not think this is the greatest idea in the world, but I cannot deny its effectiveness. Many casual divers go safely into and out of the underwater world with their preparation and dive planning effectively outsourced to the agency and its professionals. It is a bargain the agency accepts for a continuing stream of income and the casual diver accepts for its convenience.

Discussion of the responsibility the guide in question held towards his charges must be viewed through this paradigm, not through the diving ideal you or myself may prefer. This is not an indictment of any approach, but rather a reminder that attributing deaths as an inevitable result of the training agency paradigm is an entirely different topic and discussion.

I consider this guide and his dive shop to be strongly culpable in this diver's death. He failed his responsibility to prepare, he failed to gas plan, took control of his charge's ascents and sent one of them to the bottom, and then he abandoned his charge to die. He and his charges both willing entered the situation, but his was the position of responsibility. At a minimum he should never have such responsibility for divers again.

And yes, the diver who died fell victim to panic. The argument that he was also a victim of the diver training agency paradigm is not unreasonable but that is an entirely different can of worms.

 

[Miyaru]

...
...and learn that we live in a litigious society, and that the legal system is not about fairness....

Maybe in the United States. This happened outside of the US, and fear of being sued for farting under water is not an issue here.
There are other countries out there, with different legal systems.

 

[markmud]

Maybe in the United States. This happened outside of the US, and fear of being sued for farting under water is not an issue here.
There are other countries out there, with different legal systems.

Hi Miyaru,

Unfortunately, this format does not allow for a definitive essay on our opinions. You are correct though.

However, some countries have more onerous laws than the U.S.

And, the DM was in jeopardy of losing his freedom and becoming Bubba's jailmate for being incompetent, and for taking incompetent divers diving. What is the difference?

markm

 

[markmud]

No, not at all. I find it amusing that the same divers who hold the opinion that 'diving should be looked at as it really is, no rose-colored glasses, an inherently dangerous activity that must be deeply respected and undertaken with an abundance of safety, caution, training, and preparation' are also sometimes the same divers who eschew the reality of the training agency model vs the ideal of not letting novices out into the wild until they are a well-trained master of diving. I say this as someone who would prefer this ideal, but understands this is not the reality of the sport.

The reality is that novices are trained just enough to get them started in the assumption that these new divers will remain within the protective embrace of the professional training agency they began with. To be a part of this system professionally means accepting this premise, the working paradigm that means accepting responsibility for the safety of your captive agency-trained divers. I do not think this is the greatest idea in the world, but I cannot deny its effectiveness. Many casual divers go safely into and out of the underwater world with their preparation and dive planning effectively outsourced to the agency and its professionals. It is a bargain the agency accepts for a continuing stream of income and the casual diver accepts for its convenience.

Discussion of the responsibility the guide in question held towards his charges must be viewed through this paradigm, not through the diving ideal you or myself may prefer. This is not an indictment of any approach, but rather a reminder that attributing deaths as an inevitable result of the training agency paradigm is an entirely different topic and discussion.

I consider this guide and his dive shop to be strongly culpable in this diver's death. He failed his responsibility to prepare, he failed to gas plan, took control of his charge's ascents and sent one of them to the bottom, and then he abandoned his charge to die. He and his charges both willing entered the situation, but his was the position of responsibility. At a minimum he should never have such responsibility for divers again.

And yes, the diver who died fell victim to panic. The argument that he was also a victim of the diver training agency paradigm is not unreasonable but that is an entirely different can of worms.

Hi Beirstadt,

Ummmmmm... I am sorry that I did not get my point across.

In some ways I agree with you.

Blaming the training agency... Did I do that? I don't think so. An instructor can drill safety protocols all he/she wants, but if the divers don't care to learn it and practice these things to the point of subconscious and muscle memory response, whose fault is that?

Maybe they had a poor instructor. If you have a poor example of an instructor, or a diver does not want to learn, either way we have poorly trained divers.

markm

 

[Bierstadt]

Hi Beirstadt,

Ummmmmm... I am sorry that I did not get my point across.

In some ways I agree with you.

Blaming the training agency... Did I do that? I don't think so. An instructor can drill safety protocols all he/she wants, but if the divers don't care to learn it and practice these things to the point of subconscious and muscle memory response, whose fault is that?

Maybe they had a poor instructor. If you have a poor example of an instructor, or a diver does not want to learn, either way we have poorly trained divers.

markm

You did not directly blame the training agency. But that is how one gets poorly trained divers. The training agency, its dive professionals, and certification standards are BY FAR the greatest influence on diver training most divers will ever experience. These divers were products of the system. They did not take the next step to being competent independent divers, and I am confident from my own dive training they were never pushed by their agency to do so.

What good does it do to assign responsibility to those from whom it has deliberately been removed? This is not a case where these two divers were diving by themselves, responsible for themselves and within their own known limits. If that was the case then I would absolutely agree with you that is was their fault. But instead they were being guided and taken care of. The dive shop and guide said 'this is safe, trust us for your safety' to divers trained from the beginning to trust the dive shop and dive professionals.

They train to dive within a system using those supports, and when those supports fail people can die. It is impossible to know exactly what their training was like; obviously these two were not competent to safely ascend from a deep dive under the conditions they were presented with. I would point out that without the presence of the guide both divers would be alive. Firstly because they would not have done that dive without an agency-sanctioned dive professional, and second because the bends is a lot more survivable than drowning alone on the bottom of a lake.

For what it is worth, I am reasonably certain the girlfriend has made the leap to not trusting others for her safety - if she ever dives again.