Negligent homicide: Swiss diving instructor convicted over student's death

[BoltSnap]

I thought I would provide a Google translation of the full article.

..........................................................................................................................

A diving student dies during a course in Lake Thun. The Bern Higher Court finds the diving instructor guilty of serious negligence and imposes a suspended fine.

A diving instructor was found guilty of negligent homicide by the Bern Higher Court on Thursday. He had dived with a young man, his student, in Lake Thun in 2018. The student, then 29 years old, died during the dive from a pulmonary pressure injury caused by ascending too quickly.

The Higher Regional Court sentenced the diving instructor to a suspended fine of 100 daily rates of CHF 210 each, totaling CHF 21,000. Since the sentence was suspended, he will only have to pay it if he reoffends within the next two years.

In addition, the defendant must pay procedural costs and compensation and party damages to the bereaved family. Another defendant, who performed organizational duties, was acquitted of the charge of negligent homicide.

“Meeting the minimum requirements is not enough”
Although the deceased had met the minimum diving experience required for the course conducted by the defendant according to the international PADI standard for divers, the court found that this alone was not sufficient: "Meeting the minimum PADI standards is not enough. Both defendants failed to fulfill their obligations," the Higher Court judge stated in her reasoning for the verdict. Even according to PADI rules, the diving instructor should have conducted an individual risk assessment before the dive.

The Higher Court found it particularly serious that the convicted diving instructor failed to live up to his responsibility as a course leader. He had failed to adequately inquire about his participants' diving experience, even though this was one of his core duties.

"Diving instructor failed to react adequately"

During the dive itself, several critical situations arose which, according to the court, were either not recognized or misjudged. The victim showed signs of disorientation early on and made hand signals – but the diving instructor failed to react adequately.

After the diving instructor and student had already ascended a few meters, the instructor felt the student touch, but then looked at his compass. After that, he could no longer see the student. Without knowing what was going on, the diving instructor looked back at the dive computer and thus failed to notice what had happened. "That was the latest moment at which you should have communicated with the student," the judge stated in her reasons for the verdict.

The verdict is not yet final. It can be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.

It is a bit confusing to me: Did he violate the PADI standards or not?

 

[boulderjohn]

It is a bit confusing to me: Did he violate the PADI standards or not?

The standards call for him to assess the student's overall ability to do a dive. The courts said he did not do that, so that means that the instructor did not meet PADI standards. As I read it, the student had the prerequisite requirements for the class, but that was not enough--the instructor was also supposed to assess the student's overall ability for that particular dive, and that was not done.

A lot of the court decision is not based upon this but appears to be based instead on the instructor failing to provide adequate supervision curing the dive:

During the dive itself, several critical situations arose which, according to the court, were either not recognized or misjudged. The victim showed signs of disorientation early on and made hand signals – but the diving instructor failed to react adequately.​

​

After the diving instructor and student had already ascended a few meters, the instructor felt the student touch, but then looked at his compass. After that, he could no longer see the student. Without knowing what was going on, the diving instructor looked back at the dive computer and thus failed to notice what had happened. "That was the latest moment at which you should have communicated with the student," the judge stated in her reasons for the verdict.​

 

[USdiver1]

This incompetence from the student/instructor and whoever certified them as an instructor is too much.

^^^^^
This. Zero to Hero advancement without basic knowledge / experience of low viz / cold water diving just should not be.

When a certified instructor signs up for more instruction [in order to TEACH said specialty] it is incumbent upon the student instructor to have at least basic knowledge and experience of the material to be taught.

Let the OWSI take a deep diver course [the one AOWs take] and then conduct several deep dives in different environments prior to being able to become certified to teach the deep diving specialty. It's only common sense.

 

[BoltSnap]

During the dive itself, several critical situations arose which, according to the court, were either not recognized or misjudged. The victim showed signs of disorientation early on and made hand signals – but the diving instructor failed to react adequately.After the diving instructor and student had already ascended a few meters, the instructor felt the student touch, but then looked at his compass. After that, he could no longer see the student. Without knowing what was going on, the diving instructor looked back at the dive computer and thus failed to notice what had happened. "That was the latest moment at which you should have communicated with the student," the judge stated in her reasons for the verdict.

In this case, the victim was a certified dive instructor, which is very odd. He was acting as if he was on his certification dive for the OW course.

During the dive itself, several critical situations arose which, according to the court, were either not recognized or misjudged. The victim showed signs of disorientation early on and made hand signals – but the diving instructor failed to react adequately.After the diving instructor and student had already ascended a few meters, the instructor felt the student touch, but then looked at his compass. After that, he could no longer see the student. Without knowing what was going on, the diving instructor looked back at the dive computer and thus failed to notice what had happened. "That was the latest moment at which you should have communicated with the student," the judge stated in her reasons for the verdict.

In this case, the victim was a certified dive instructor, which is very odd. He was acting as if he was on his certification dive for the ow course.

 

[sena_akutsa]

after reading through the translated article, things still don't add up for me:
reaching 40m (130 ft) means the skills to learn are "how to manage air" AND "how to deal with narcosis".
- an Instructor teaching a student without observing his signs ?
- a student which is OWSI (instructor! more than 100 dives!) losing buoyancy control ? or ascend uncontrolled ?

 

[boulderjohn]

a student which is OWSI (instructor! more than 100 dives!) losing buoyancy control ? or ascend uncontrolled ?

Why did the diver go to the surface? We don't know what happened, but it is perfectly possible for a highly skilled diver to have this happen under the right circumstances.

It happened to a former instructor of mine, a TDI tech instructor; UTD tech instructor; and cave diver. He was at 100 feet near the end of a troubled deco dive, doing a stop at about 100 feet when he lost and could not regain buoyancy control. He went to the surface, assuming as he went that he was going to die. Fortunately, they had already sent up a signal for trouble, and a boat was already there when he hit the surface. They put him on oxygen immediately, which enabled him to survive with only 3 months of paraplegia.

Why did he lose control? He told me he has no idea.

We don't know enough about this story to hazard a guess.

 

[sena_akutsa]

while learning recently, each time we reached 40m our instructors were watching at us like at a bowl of milk on a stove.
Also during ascend, in case someone begins to ascend faster than should.

 

[cerich]

No, I mean, if court decided that the PADI standard requirements are not sufficient for bringing a student to the depth described in the course, how do the court expect an instructor to know better than PADI?

It should be the agencies responsible to create safe boundaries - not something every single instructor should have to "develop" individually, because then there would be no more standards.

the court expected the instructor to follow PADI standards, that included an evaluation of the students ability, that was not done, regardless of the fact that the student otherwise met the min requirements for the course they were taking. The truth is that too many instructors teach classes to students that meet the min standards in prerequisites for previous certs/dives and don't do an evaluation or consider the type of experience and if appropriate (in regards to temp, vis, etc) to the conditions that the course will be conducted in but just jump into the course. Obviously that isn't a problem in the vast majority of cases but NOT all cases, this being one of them.

The whole idea is that an instructor teaching a class in an environment should be capable of figuring out if someone is experienced and qualified to take a class beyond meeting min standards from a training agency. The agencies themselves recommend more from their instructors and overall it happens less than it should.

As an instructor trainer, I once made a mistake teaching an instructor that I had done many dives with that had been in the industry full time for 8 years an advanced nitrox/deco instructors class, assuming they had taught enough recreational nitrox and advanced OW/deep diving specialty to meet the low bar required from the agency. Their in water ability was superb, the paperwork when I submitted it and the agency checked the would be new tech instructors record of certifications issued became an issue, as it should have.