new divers and rescue skills

[DCBC]

...Jim Lapenta was stating that even a brand new open water diver right out of basic open water training should be able to support a diver at the surface, get control of a panicked diver at the surface, bring up an unconscious diver from depth, tow and unconscious diver while stripping gear to the boat/shore.

To me that seems like an awful lot of task loading for a complete newbie. To use another analogy, it's like teaching a skier to do a snow plow and then take them to the top of the mountain for trip down black diamond experts run.... I think divers get the most out of a CPR first responder course and Rescue Diver course after they have several dives under their belt. IMO I think they should be able to instinctively control their buoyancy and trim while diving before presented with rescue/emergency responsibilities.

It seems to me that diving instructional programs across the board have become "more user friendly" over time. A diver (in some cases) can be a non-swimmer and become certified. Often newly certified divers are not required to be independent in that they have no need to survey a dive site for hazards and often leave the safety of the dive to the Divemaster. It has also been a trend that diver rescue has been considered something left to the DM. It has become somehow "acceptable" to leave rescue to a more advanced class (should the diver optionally choose to continue with further training).

I believe that diver training has been dumbed down too much for my liking. It's true that technology has given us many safety advantages in the field of diving over the years, but as I'm from the "old school," I don't believe that technology is sufficient in-itself. From my experience, the underwater world is far from a predictable environment. Bad things happen and it's only through fitness and proper training that some of these potentially lethal incidents can result in a safe conclusion.

I don't believe that your "black diamond run" example is appropriate. I believe that giving a diver a certification card without rescue training (as Jim has described) is like giving someone a driver's license and them telling them that they can optionally come back for further training to cover red lights and stop signs. Although it's possible to dive without ever having to deal with such eventualities, I believe it's just a matter of time. In diving this can happen on a newly certified divers first dive... New divers should not dive solo. What do you think you are doing when you dive with a "Buddy" that doesn't have a clue of how to save you? I've been teaching for 41 years. Every diver I've certified has demonstrated rescuing an unconscious victim at depth.

 

[Agility]

People also need to remember that there are no quick weekend courses in the SEI system.​

I would not be diving now, had I not been offered a 4-day course at the hotel during my vacation in Turkey in 2004.
I am sure many divers start out this way. Some stay at the level of Seahorsing the riffs behind a guide and others move on to really learn to dive.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

And there's the difference between divers and underwater tourists. I choose not to train people to that level or in fact dive with the latter. Nor would I let a loved one dive with them.

 

[lowviz]

...//... -intimidating and rewarding instruction....//....

The task first appeared intimidating. My partner and I looked at each other and said "we can do this."

...//... Rescue is an intense class. It should be. But it should not be intimidating or marketed in a way that students think it is beyond their ability.

Right now that seems to be the case if you read some of the posts here. ...//....

I can see how someone would read it that way. By way of clarification, here is the old report of what actually happened: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ba...e-diver-course-students-view.html#post5995155

 

[Peter Guy]

A couple of responses.

1. PADI does require rescue training in the OW class. People who say it doesn't are wrong. PADI does not require raising an unresponsive diver. It does require surface rescue skills - tows and towing (for what it is worth the only rescue scenario I've ever been in real life). PADI also teaches OOA skills for the diver (probably the most likely uw panicked diver scenario) including assisting the diver to the surface and assisting the diver at the surface.

2. As many of you know I was taught in the good old days in a 16 week program. If I was taught how to bring an unresponsive diver to the surface I sure don't remember it. I do think I remember surface rescue - which what I have used.

3. I continue to be amazed, and bemused, by those who denigrate the PADI standards. When properly taught I believe they create a good,basic, diver -- otoh, any agency's instructor who just goes through the motions can create a poor diver.

 

[lowviz]

...//....

3. I continue to be amazed, and bemused, by those who denigrate the PADI standards. When properly taught I believe they create a good,basic, diver -- otoh, any agency's instructor who just goes through the motions can create a poor diver.

What stuck with me from my PADI OW training was learning how to do a real emergency swimming ascent from depth in a quarry. (Instructor-in-face all the way)

What stuck with me from Lapenta's rescue course was how to deal with a panicked diver, above and below.

-I like to mix up instructors, each seems to have a particular "thing" that they see as being important.

 

[Thalassamania]

Start hijack.

...

3. I continue to be amazed, and bemused, by those who denigrate the PADI standards. When properly taught I believe they create a good,basic, diver

The problem, Peter, boulderjohn, lowviz, DMJohn, freewillie, et. al., is that while ya'll have demonstrated that indeed, a good basic diver can be crearted within PADI standards, doing so requires non-traditional approaches, a dash of sealawyering, a bit of adding, a modicum of ignoring the occasional fine point, and then ... when push comes to shove, not testing, so that you really don't know if all worked out right. Why do you think that a fair number of very capable, highly experienced, quite mature diving instructors here on ScubaBoard reject PADI? Do you think it is a "club" thing? Or perhaps just a matter of, "not invented here?" Do you think that any of us really give a damn which of the organizations we send our registration fees to? I hate to burst you bubble, but it is none of the above. It stems from base line philosophical differences and ethical problems with PADI, and frankly I continue to be amazed and bemused by those who can not see what is clear as day to me.

"Why did you choose PADI?" That's a question that I've asked many, many, people ... and you know what? Not one has ever looked me straight in the eye as said, "I looked at all the agencies and decided that I could train divers better using their standards and system then I could with any other." Instead I heard things like, "The shop was PADI." or "There are more PADI stores." or "Well ... I have to make a living." etc.

-- otoh, any agency's instructor who just goes through the motions can create a poor diver.

No question about that.

End hijack.

 

[Peter Guy]

[continuing hijack]

requires non-traditional approaches, a dash of sealawyering, a bit of adding, a modicum of ignoring the occasional fine point, and then ... when push comes to shove, not testing, so that you really don't know if all worked out right.

No, it does not, at least in my always and ever so humble of opinion.

"Non-traditional approach" -- unless you are referring to the "on your knees" as the "traditional" approach, I don't know of anything I teach that is "non-traditional." But then, NWGrateDiver would also be teaching a "non-traditional" approach in his NAUI OW class would he not?

"sea lawyering" -- Thal, you keep referring to that and you are just wrong. You have stated before that I do "sea lawyering" because I have actually attempted to READ and integrate both the substance and the intent of the PADI standards. I don't think there is any "sea lawyering" going on but, to the contrary, just plain old common sense and a following of what I was taught in my IDC.

"wink and a nod" -- Perhaps a little here and there but even then, my approach has been to follow the intent of the standards/skills as much as possible and use the freedom given within the PADI Standards to do what is best for the student.

As someone who has taken GUE classes (and been asked if I wanted to become a GUE instructor); someone who has taken UTD classes (and been asked if I wanted to become a UTD instructor); someone who has taken NAUI classes (and been asked if I wanted to become a NAUI instructor), Thal, I hope YOU ask me why I stay a PADI instructor. If you did, you'd get the same response the others have received:

a. I believe in the PADI system. Over all, I like the progression of training; the outline of the training; the materials used for training; the overall system.

b. The PADI system works for me and for my students.

c. I like my local LDS and the OW class system the owner has set up -- 2 nights/week for 3 weeks (class and pool) with successive Saturdays for OW dives.

Why would I want to change?

 

[lowviz]

...//...The problem, ...//...lowviz, ...//... is that while ya'll have demonstrated that indeed, a good basic diver can be crearted within PADI standards, doing so requires non-traditional approaches, ...//....

And???

 

[freewillie]

Back on subject.

I'm not saying that Rescue skills, CPR, first aid are not important. Indeed they are. Question is more along the lines of what is a reasonable expectation of beginner divers. I'm not theorizing in a perfect world we should all be able to do x,y, and z.

I don't know how many times we've debated on SB that AOW training does not make you and advanced diver. Most everyone says that you've taken a class that exposes you to advanced diving conditions but you need experience to be an advanced diver. Simply getting the c-card in the mail doesn't make you the advanced diver.

And that's my point with stressing rescue skills as part of basic OW training. If you want to belittle PADI training as underwater tourist that is your opinion. What I've noticed here on SB is that many instructors have personal issue with PADI for whatever reason and any type of training through PADI is automatically not as good as the other alphabet soup of dive training organizations.

The last dive I did was with my 13 daughter who has Jr OW dive cert through PADI. It was her 3rd dive post certification. She was able to clear her mask when it was leaking through the whole dive and not freak or panic (it was a new mask from Christmas and she didn't quite have it adjusted properly), maintain her buoyancy reasonable well, deal with a 7mm wetsuit hood/gloves/booties, monitor her air consumption at all times, and have a great time. She kept track of her air and gave me signal time to turn around at agreed upon PSI and we were back on board with 700 psi as planned. Not bad for a beginner.

While it would have been "nice" that my buddy was a fully trained in CPR and had rescue diver training most divers do not. I don't feel that diving with her was any more dangerous than diving with any other diver who does not have formal rescue diver training. Simply adding extra hours and course material during basic training doesn't necessarily make one a rescue diver. And with all the task loading that goes into diving for those first few dives after certification I'm just questioning how effective new divers handle emergencies. IMO stressing rescue skills is more appropriate after someone has had few more dives and more experience.

In that light I don't think breaking up training into different modules is a bad or evil thing. We keep saying here that divers should wait a little bit after OW training for AOW training. Yes, you can enroll immediately after basic but you get more out of it when you've had more dives and more experience. Why is that any different from Rescue Diver skills?