PADI vs NAUI

[SeaCobra]

I can understand where the two points got confused, I did muddle them together and you are right in that they are separate skills. So, let’s just focus on recovering an unconscious/unresponsive diver from depth. I say it is a valid skill and you would disagree. As I understand, your point is that when you encounter an unconscious diver at depth they are essentially dead. They should just be left there and perhaps pointed out to the divemaster after the dive.

The problem here is we are looking at fatality statistics and not surviving statistics. I agree that this person’s chances are slim, but if we do not bring the diver to the surface, as you would suggest, than their chances of survival are zero, nil, nada, they will go on to meet their Maker and join the Choir Invisible.

However, what if they are not completely dead and only mostly dead? What if they do have a chance at survival, albeit slim? Wouldn't you rather give that diver a fighting chance? Wouldn't you prefer someone give you that chance if something were to happen to you underwater? I know I would.

Studies do show that the sooner we can bring a drowning victim to the surface and perform full blown CPR their survival chances do increase. And since we do not know how long the victim has been unconscious we need to act quickly. Maybe they have only been out for a few seconds, or maybe it has been an hour. Still, it’s worth a shot.

And that is one of the reasons that I feel make NAUI a better agency and I will continue to teach this skill.

 

[Peter Guy]

(I was NOT going to get into this, but, just maybe, SOMEBODY IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET.... )

SeaCobra -- You are correct that IF a diver comes upon a non-breathing diver within, say 180 seconds of breathing cessation, then there is a chance (slim though it may be, it is the only chance) to save the victim. OK, how much time do you spend in your OW class teaching that skill? How much time in Open Water do you spend evaluating that skill? Now, query, is there any thing else that you could be teaching the OW student that just might make that student a more competent diver?

It is this last question that prevents me from teaching the "skill" to OW divers in my PADI class. I'll confess that my class has a finite time period (not to mention student band width) and I just believe there are other, more relevant and important, things for a student to learn and practice. (Note -- contrary to popular opinion from some with the initials of JL, PADI OW students are introduced to non-responsive diver recovery and are shown that it can be done and how to do it -- it just isn't done as an in-water skill.)

SeaCobra -- another question on this issue -- How often do you think your OW students practice the non-responsive diver recovery skill after their OW class? If they appear to be like the majority of divers, they don't (as far as I can tell, the vast majority of OW divers don't practice any "skill" after class except clearing their mask (mandatory in most cases!) and putting the reg in their mouth and breathing -- again mandatory if they put their head under water). And without practicing the skill, is it really one they'll be able to perform in the exceedingly tiny chance they'll ever come across a non-breathing diver on the bottom?

I really think there is a huge conceit on the part of many instructors who think they can teach everything and that the vast majority of beginning divers will be able to properly execute all of the skills at some unknown time in the future. As for me, I'm just hoping that I can teach my OW students a few basic skills well enough so that they can feel comfortable diving and thus continue to dive and perfect those few basic skills.

 

[Hawkwood]

..... As for me, I'm just hoping that I can teach my OW students a few basic skills well enough so that they can feel comfortable diving and thus continue to dive and perfect those few basic skills.

Peter,

I like that statement very much.

 

[boulderjohn]

I really think there is a huge conceit on the part of many instructors who think they can teach everything and that the vast majority of beginning divers will be able to properly execute all of the skills at some unknown time in the future. As for me, I'm just hoping that I can teach my OW students a few basic skills well enough so that they can feel comfortable diving and thus continue to dive and perfect those few basic skills.

This point reminds me of another SB poster who advocates an extremely thorough OW class. One of the skills he makes sure beginning OW students learn is being able to tie a bowline with one hand while wearing three-fingered mittens or dry gloves. He feels all beginning divers should learn this skill because there may come a time in the future when they may need it. When challenged on it, his reply is that it only takes a half hour to learn the skill--big deal. IMO, that time wold be better spent working on other skills that the diver definitely will need.

The educational concept in place here is interference theory. Interference is any learning that interferes with the student's ability to learn other facts and skills. Although it is much more complex than this, the idea is that if you want them to learn the very important knowledge and skills identified as A, B, C, D, and F, you spend as little time possible teaching things that are not as essential because they interfere with the student's ability to learn A, B, C, D, and F. That is why, for example, although I go into decompression theory more than the text does in my classes, I don't go into it anywhere near as far as I am capable of doing, because they don't need to know any more than that for that level of diving. If I went into bubble theory, for example, in depth, that would interfere with their ability to learn the stuff that really matters. When I teach technical diving, then I do go into those things.

 

[SeaCobra]

OK, how much time do you spend in your OW class teaching that skill? How much time in Open Water do you spend evaluating that skill? Now, query, is there any thing else that you could be teaching the OW student that just might make that student a more competent diver?



SeaCobra -- another question on this issue -- How often do you think your OW students practice the non-responsive diver recovery skill after their OW class? If they appear to be like the majority of divers, they don't (as far as I can tell, the vast majority of OW divers don't practice any "skill" after class except clearing their mask (mandatory in most cases!) and putting the reg in their mouth and breathing -- again mandatory if they put their head under water). And without practicing the skill, is it really one they'll be able to perform in the exceedingly tiny chance they'll ever come across a non-breathing diver on the bottom?

I really think there is a huge conceit on the part of many instructors who think they can teach everything and that the vast majority of beginning divers will be able to properly execute all of the skills at some unknown time in the future. As for me, I'm just hoping that I can teach my OW students a few basic skills well enough so that they can feel comfortable diving and thus continue to dive and perfect those few basic skills.

So, you are saying we should not teach a skill because folks won't practice it later? How often do they practice air sharing, ESA, removing weight belts, etc.? I do not feel this is a valid argument against teaching recovering an unconscious diver from depth.

Admittedly, I am in lucky in that I own the dive shop, I set the course hours and sylabus. The course has eight 1&1/2 hour pool sessions and one entire pool session is dedicated to assists, self-rescue and rescue.
By the end they have done 4 to 6 rescues of an unconscious diver, along with a few tired diver tows and ditching of weightbelts (I use soft weights to avoid pool damage).

In open water each student is evaluated on a tired diver tow (approx 100 yards) and recovering an unconscious diver from a depth of about 15 feet, establishing positive buoyancy for themselves and the victim and a do-si-do tow to shore.

This May will mark the 2 year anniversary of a tragedy at my local training lake. I assisted in the unsuccessful efforts to save a young lad. He ran out of air, he and his buddy did get to the surface but was unable to establish positive buoyancy. The diver sank and his buddy did not have the skill set to remove the divers weights, manually inflate a bc and could not get this diver to the surface.

He called for help and other, more experienced divers did recover the diver, but resuscitation efforts were unsuccessful. Perhaps if that diver had had more training at an earlier time AND been taught the value of the skill, it may have made for a different outcome.

---------- Post added March 31st, 2013 at 03:06 PM ----------

This point reminds me of another SB poster who advocates an extremely thorough OW class. One of the skills he makes sure beginning OW students learn is being able to tie a bowline with one hand while wearing three-fingered mittens or dry gloves. He feels all beginning divers should learn this skill because there may come a time in the future when they may need it. When challenged on it, his reply is that it only takes a half hour to learn the skill--big deal. IMO, that time wold be better spent working on other skills that the diver definitely will need.

The educational concept in place here is interference theory. Interference is any learning that interferes with the student's ability to learn other facts and skills. Although it is much more complex than this, the idea is that if you want them to learn the very important knowledge and skills identified as A, B, C, D, and F, you spend as little time possible teaching things that are not as essential because they interfere with the student's ability to learn A, B, C, D, and F. That is why, for example, although I go into decompression theory more than the text does in my classes, I don't go into it anywhere near as far as I am capable of doing, because they don't need to know any more than that for that level of diving. If I went into bubble theory, for example, in depth, that would interfere with their ability to learn the stuff that really matters. When I teach technical diving, then I do go into those things.

Respectfully - aw c'mon, this is a stretch! we are not talking about some "Men of Honor" movie scene, but practical rescue skills. There is not any interference going on.

 

[supergaijin]

This May will mark the 2 year anniversary of a tragedy at my local training lake. I assisted in the unsuccessful efforts to save a young lad. He ran out of air, he and his buddy did get to the surface but was unable to establish positive buoyancy. The diver sank and his buddy did not have the skill set to remove the divers weights, manually inflate a bc and could not get this diver to the surface.

With all due respect... manual inflation of a BCD is a Standard in PADI. Weight removal at the surface is also a Standard. It is not much of a leap from doing this for yourself to helping a diver in distress. Helping another diver at the surface is addressed in the Quiz.

Quiz 2A, what is the most important feature of a weight system?
Quiz 3A, you can prevent most surface emergencies by....
Quiz 3A, what is the first thing you should do with an injured diver at the surface?

Not trying to make light of this tragedy but PADI does cover weight removal, and IMHO it is adequate for beginners.

 

[SeaCobra]

Not trying to make light of this tragedy but PADI does cover weight removal, and IMHO it is adequate for beginners.

well, it was NOT adequate! And this rescue went from the surface to at depth because those things were not done. Now the situation escalated and the dive buddy was never introduced to recovering a diver from depth.

Now, I am sure you could argue that since things were not done well at the surface, what makes me think that the correct things would have done at depth? Things happen fast and at some point the diver's training should kick in. But, if they do not have that tool in their toolbox, they will never reach for it.

 

[261311]

I think the delicate balance of included course materials is derived from preventative measures vs. reactive. If statistically speaking, you have such a small window to save someone under water, of which- if half that time has been eaten up because you haven't glanced at your buddy in a minute because something caught your eye you have to start teaching preventative measures. That's where air sharing, removing belts, CESA's and a host of other skills come into play in a basic OW class. In the defense of others however, no the typical diver doesn't practice skills, but learning them initially (no matter how half-assed) gives them confidence that if it hits the fan, they can possibly be achieved rather than an underwater panic attack. In the end, in a limited scope class would it be better for people to be able to help themselves, or help others? I personally vote help themselves it time is limited because it reduces on the need to know how to help others if they can control their own situations.

This isn't to say that both reactive and preventative skills aren't important.

 

[scjoe]

This point reminds me of another SB poster who advocates an extremely thorough OW class. One of the skills he makes sure beginning OW students learn is being able to tie a bowline with one hand while wearing three-fingered mittens or dry gloves. He feels all beginning divers should learn this skill because there may come a time in the future when they may need it. When challenged on it, his reply is that it only takes a half hour to learn the skill--big deal. IMO, that time wold be better spent working on other skills that the diver definitely will need.

You're leaving out the fact that he is spending that half hour in the context of a hundred hour course and your course is, most likely, a fraction of that length.

 

[jIM STEELE]

Time in pool is big , mussel memory comfort reflects and more skils find an inst. you like naui has more flexabilty to teach to your needs