Non professional divers taking very young children diving (even in a pool)

[redacted]

I wonder what the shop would have done had the grandfather selected a new regulator rather than the tank rental. Actually, I think I know. Anybody in the KY area want to test that out?

 

[Wookie]

I wonder what the shop would have done had the grandfather selected a new regulator rather than the tank rental. Actually, I think I know. Anybody in the KY area want to test that out?

Is it really worth it to buy a cheap regulator?

 

[redacted]

Is it really worth it to buy a cheap regulator?

All of my regs were inexpensive, some are cheap.

If you are referring to the "test", the test result would be in before any $$$ was wasted.

 

[Wookie]

All of my regs were inexpensive, some are cheap.

If you are referring to the "test", the test result would be in before any $$$ was wasted.

All of your regs I've seen are of very high quality, but didn't cost you much.

 

[jonhall]

Of course you should do what you are comfortable with but people do crazy things all of the time. At what age should a child be introduced to any activity that has an inherent danger involved like riding a bike or skateboarding, and who should make that determination?

Forgetting the reg as a part of the situation, I wouldn’t hesitate introducing scuba skills, by way of mask, snorkel, fins, and yes even air, in a swimming pool to my grand daughter, but only after she becomes proficient in some swimming skills (had her in the pool for the first time this past weekend - age 4 months.) I was once a water safety instructor (back in the day) and only have OW certification. Who’s to say the guy with the old reg isn’t a strong swimmer, who also dives a couple of times a year in his pool. But 5 is pretty young for actual scuba!


Regarding the reg, if I had the equipment to service and test my reg and it fails to function properly and puts me in danger, it was my fault. If a dive shop services my reg and it fails and puts me in danger, is it their fault and are they liable?

 

[tstormdiver]

I wonder what the shop would have done had the grandfather selected a new regulator rather than the tank rental. Actually, I think I know. Anybody in the KY area want to test that out?

Fortunately, we were out of stock on our low end, unbalanced Oceanic regulators. That is the lowest end reg we regularly have in stock. In fact we are out of stock on most of our regulators right now (we've had a few families outfitting themselves lately).

 

[DaleC]

He basically said," Since you can not fix my old regulator, I want to find an inexpensive one so that I can take my 5, 7 & 8 yr old grand kids diving in the pool".

Sounds logical to me. I would hope that any reg your shop sold would be safe enough to actually work underwater, in which case, why buy an expensive one to swim in a pool? If I'm renting a car to just putt around town I would say "which one is cheapest", not "give me the Caddy".

 

[drrich2]

After being told that we would not be able to service it, he looked around for a "cheap" regulator set & let it slip that he wanted to take his 8, 7 & 5 yr old grandkids diving in the family pool. Of course we suggested to him that his plan was not a good one & he shot back, "once I leave here you can't control what I do". True enough,.. we can't. We went over the potential risks, to which he would reply, " I was certified a long time ago & I'm an experienced diver". When asked how much/ often he dove, he replied that he dove once or twice a year in his pool, but had not been open water diving in over a decade. Then asked to rent a tank so that he could try to get his non functioning regulator working again. At this point knowing his intentions, we refused. Kind of a gray area, since he was a certified diver, but with knowing what he wanted to do,... it was decided that we could not risk the liability. Now, to the point,.... What are people's thoughts on situations like this?

I'm narrowing the focus to this part of the original post inquiry. Too easy to go off on tangents otherwise.

A man with no recent dive experience outside a pool intended to rent a tank for the stated purpose of trying to get a non-functioning 40 year old regulator that the shop professionals couldn't even service working, working adequately enough in his opinion but likely not confirmed by a formally trained technician, expressed a defiant and entitled attitude to your suggestion his plan was not a good one, and intended to subject a 5 year old child in a pool to this getup.

You and your fellow shop staff chose not to provide a product that would enable this.

I see no moral, ethical or legal (disclaimer: I'm no lawyer!) wrong in that.

As to what I think of the old guy's attitude, I don't know him, his background, how much research & knowledge he has, just how deep this pool is or how hazardous the situation would be, so while my knee jerk reaction is to deem him a reckless fool, there may be more to it than that.

Richard.

 

[tstormdiver]

Actually, Rich, I totally get the guy's reasoning behind what he wanted to do. Who is not or has not been excited about diving? If not, this site would not exist. I fear there is probably a lot of ignorance or even denial of what can go wrong in this case. I only did the best I could to educate the gentleman,.. but by then, he was not likely listening, because it was not what he wanted to hear. I suppose it to say, that it is usually better to err on the side of caution than to wish you had in the middle of consequences.

 

[redacted]

I'm narrowing the focus to this part of the original post inquiry. Too easy to go off on tangents otherwise.

A man with no recent dive experience outside a pool intended to rent a tank for the stated purpose of trying to get a non-functioning 40 year old regulator that the shop professionals couldn't even service working, working adequately enough in his opinion but likely not confirmed by a formally trained technician, expressed a defiant and entitled attitude to your suggestion his plan was not a good one, and intended to subject a 5 year old child in a pool to this getup.

You and your fellow shop staff chose not to provide a product that would enable this.

I see no moral, ethical or legal (disclaimer: I'm no lawyer!) wrong in that.

As to what I think of the old guy's attitude, I don't know him, his background, how much research & knowledge he has, just how deep this pool is or how hazardous the situation would be, so while my knee jerk reaction is to deem him a reckless fool, there may be more to it than that.

Richard.

Don't read too much into this idea that the shop could not fix that regulator. Few shops will touch a regulator unless it is a brand they carry and the mfgr is still providing service kit support. Many of those shops would not have a tech familiar with a 40m Y/O regulator. Yet that regulator might well be perfectly serviceable and usable. I dive a few regulators that shops would not touch including some that were discarded by shops that could or would not repair them.

Just because scuba agencies decline to provide training to younger children does not mean that younger children are incapable of some level of scuba activity. Heck, how much have the training agencies lowered their age requirements over the last 30 years? And those changes were not made based on new technologies or new understanding of physiology. The primary motivation was profit opportunities. If there was enough demand (read profit opportunities) I'm sure agencies would welcome 5 Y/Os with their parents CC into a Scuba Ranger program.