Legal & other issues from SG Mishap

[Knight]

If there was only one body i'm sure they would leave, but in a mass-incident like this they NEED to investigate what happen and do the *who* *what* *when* where* and *why* you never know if foul play could be a issue very rare but everything needs to be looked at in a sudden freak incident like this.

Always descending,
C.H.

 

[mdmbike to scuba]

Not to be contentious, but why not leave them there? The accounts say that the bodies are in a remote corner of the ship, and therefore unlikely to be encountered by other divers.

In this case, obviously, the divers did not provide for an optional burial at sea, and therefore there is really no choice. But, if waivers addressed this issue in the future, then wouldn't it be acceptable to simply leave divers if that is the risk they agreed to take and wait for their remains to eventually, if ever, surface? I just dont thing this is a good idea at all. People will try to find the bodies for sure. Then we might just see more bodies down there. I would say get them out and home so there familys can say bye. Mark my .02

 

[daniel f aleman]

The bodies won't be left there; the county will demand a death certificate, and someone will be hired to get them. Also, no one wants thrill seekers risking their lives making amateurish attempts at body recovery.

 

[pir8]

The bodies would serve as a lure to draw the morbid that deep into the ship to see them. Photographs would be posted on the internet. YouTube clips. It would be ugly. It might inspire laws to be passed ...like the internet photos of 'trophies' from the USS Murphy inspired laws to be passed regarding all military wrecks as 'war graves'.

Its simply unnecessary. The bodies will be removed by a competent team and the post-traumatic circus will commence...

This is why the bodies can't be left down there. Because untrained people will go to see them and add to the collection!

 

[Flightlead]

It is all well and good to say that people should have the right to take these risks. But should that right end at putting others in harms way to come and look for you or recover your remains? Should waivers should include "do not rescue or recover my remains" language? Inquiring minds want to know.

I think so! In fact, I'm in the process of re-doing my will at the moment and I think I will include just such a clause. Given my hobbies, I doubt there'd be much left to sweep up anyway, except in the case of a diving accident.

 

[Boatlawyer]

This is why the bodies can't be left down there. Because untrained people will go to see them and add to the collection!

But isn't this another version of mommy-government? If people want to be "lured" into danger by the morbid curiousity, isn't that another God-given right to self-govern? Where oh where does it end?

 

[pir8]

If there was only one body i'm sure they would leave, but in a mass-incident like this they NEED to investigate what happen and do the *who* *what* *when* where* and *why* you never know if foul play could be a issue very rare but everything needs to be looked at in a sudden freak incident like this.

Always descending,
C.H.

They cannot leave even 1 body in that wreck, too much access to it.

 

[Scuba_Jenny]

The only place I have ever heard of bodies being left behind is on Mt. Everest. Otherwise, for the sake of closure, the body (ies) need to be recovered. Let the pros handle it, that is what they are trained to do. This accident is really no different than what happens when a cave diver dies deep within the recesses of a cave. I recall maybe a year ago a couple cave divers having to be recovered, and the deco times of the team was upwards of 4 hrs!

 

[pir8]

But isn't this another version of mommy-government? If people want to be "lured" into danger by the morbid curiousity, isn't that another God-given right to self-govern? Where oh where does it end?

Unfortunately it doesn't end. I would say you can leave a body in the Doria but not the SG.

 

[shakeybrainsurgeon]

This incident has parallels to the supposedly experienced climbers lost this past winter on Mt, Hood. One of the talking head cable shows had an interesting debate between a spokesperson for the National Geographic Society (who advocated for the "everyone has the right to test his/her limits, even to the point of death" position) and another advocate who said that access to such sites should be more closely monitored for weather, training of the climbers, etc.

The second person made a good point in saying that such weekend adventurers do not have the "right" to risk their lives because it wasn't only their lives they risked, but also those that had to come after them.

Also, before doing a dive at the limits of our experience, we should consider the impact an accident will have, not only on the family and friends, but on the boat and crew that have to witness events, deal with the outcome and live with the consequences of your "right" to kill yourself.

We have discussed obligations of the charter boats to the divers, but what about divers to the charter boats? Is it fair to them to embark on something extreme without their knowledge? This particular dive sounds like a techical dive, but another poster said that charters like scuba-do don't take out techical divers? Something doesn't make sense in that regard. The boat has a right to know what a diver is up to, if it exceeds the scope of the chartered trip.