Rescue Diver Class..........worth it?

[sheck33]

gmount once bubbled...
I just took the Padi version. I feel that it was basic at best and anyone with a heartbeat and 300 bucks could have passed it with flying colors.

Doing a tired diver tow shouldnt be tough, maybe if you were doing it for extended periods. (After that id get a new buddy)
I expect my buddies and they expect me to be in Good physical and mental shape. They nor I would dive with someone who wasnt.
I got a laugh when they told me that a victims bc should be unfastened.
Why would i bother to unfasten a victims BC?
Thats why I carry shears. Cutting the damn thing off will certainly save you time. And if you save the guy I hardly think any good person would care about lost equipment.

In your opinion is there any better classes given?
Im not happy and I feel as if I wasted money.
And if a person has to practice skills from ow or aow and uses this course as a refresher I feel thats wrong. No class will teach you comfort or confidence.
-My two cents
greg

I agree

But you will understand that i wouldnt want my straps cut just doing a practice class As far as being in good physical shape, that unfortuneately is not a PADI requirement, if you can dogpaddle across a pool for 200 or so yards taking as much time as you need you'r fine

Dont be too sure someone you save will not turn around and sue you for lost equipment, families of divers that died have sued instructors, divers and diveshops even thought the diver that died had a heart condition, was a chainsmoker, had had no excercise of any kind prior to the dive and was a diabetic!!
(just proving a point here of course)

yes there is better dive education available

 

[kwesler]

I had the living daylights kicked out of me during the course! My "victims" were instructed to make it as hard as possible for me, and to be more difficult than a "real" victim. I did the ocean dives in pouring rain, a ripping current and surge, and 4' chop.

I am 38, and felt 75 when I was done, but felt it was worth every second.

Ken

 

[DivePartner1]

Sheck has a saddly valid point on our litigious soceity.

In many states and Canadian provinces, good samaritan laws protect a rescuer for liability for first aid given in good faith, but if the rescure has a current 2 year first aid certification. Even than, the protected Good Samaritan could be sued have face thousands of dollars in legal expense to have the claim dismissed (except in Canada the successful defendant would at least be entitled to recoup attorneys fees).

This rule "might" apply to a rescue diver swimming in a victim, but maybe not.

The Texas legislature removed even this protection from the Good Samaritan: only the EMT and emergency room physician are sheilded from liability for providing first aid--everyone else is lawsuit fodder unless they calmly watch the victim slip away. (Of course the DM, captain, boat, certification agency and dive buddy will be sued regardless).

Can anyone explain the policy rationale for the Texas law?

 

[sheck33]

kwesler once bubbled...
I had the living daylights kicked out of me during the course! My "victims" were instructed to make it as hard as possible for me, and to be more difficult than a "real" victim. I did the ocean dives in pouring rain, a ripping current and surge, and 4' chop.

I am 38, and felt 75 when I was done, but felt it was worth every second.

Ken

Yes, to a large degree that is very true. Although i doubt that any person that is not in distress can make it harder on you than a 'real' victim would
Instructors make a big difference but they can only do so much without getting in trouble with their agency or more importantly the diveshop they are affiliated with.

 

[kwesler]

i doubt that any person that is not in distress can make it harder on you than a 'real' victim would

Yes they can! A real victim, in my experience, is BLINDED by their panic. The Instructors as victims kept coming after me, turning to meet me, and purposely trying to pull off my mask, reg etc., rather than just trying to stay afloat/alive!

 

[gmount]

DivePartner1 once bubbled...
Sheck has a saddly valid point on our litigious soceity.

In many states and Canadian provinces, good samaritan laws protect a rescuer for liability for first aid given in good faith, but if the rescure has a current 2 year first aid certification. Even than, the protected Good Samaritan could be sued have face thousands of dollars in legal expense to have the claim dismissed (except in Canada the successful defendant would at least be entitled to recoup attorneys fees).

This rule "might" apply to a rescue diver swimming in a victim, but maybe not.

The Texas legislature removed even this protection from the Good Samaritan: only the EMT and emergency room physician are sheilded from liability for providing first aid--everyone else is lawsuit fodder unless they calmly watch the victim slip away. (Of course the DM, captain, boat, certification agency and dive buddy will be sued regardless).

Can anyone explain the policy rationale for the Texas law?

In New Jersey, a person is protected under the good samaritan law, IF: They provided help in good faith, and to the level at which they are trained.
However, In my area a rescue company (fire department) had been sued for removing a roof from a crashed vehicle in which a drunk driver was pinned under the dash. He sought to recover damages suffered to his car even though he would have surely been still trapped inside of it.
I dont doubt that people in the dive world get sued for helping someone. Unfortunately, In the future we will PROBABLY see many people just look the other way at a rescue because they cant afford to risk there life savings in a lawsuit. Personally if someone wishes to file suit against me for saving them, I am a firm believer in what goes around comes around. (And i bet my scumbag lawyer is better than your scumbag lawyer)

-Greg

 

[DivePartner1]

Careful with the name calling, Greg. You don't whose on this board, or whose side we're on. Or what we've done for good or ill.

Blame and litigation are as much about greedy people as anything.

For the board, I'll post a summary of Good Samaritan laws based on a study I had done in selected states and provinces.

 

[gmount]

DivePartner1 once bubbled...
Careful with the name calling, Greg. You don't whose on this board, or whose side we're on. Or what we've done for good or ill.

Blame and litigation are as much about greedy people as anything.

For the board, I'll post a summary of Good Samaritan laws based on a study I had done in selected states and provinces.

I wasnt calling names, just stating my opinion.
A summary of the Good Samaritan laws is a great thing. Unfortunately I do not have much faith in them protecting me.

-Greg

 

[DivePartner1]

Thank you for helping us understand the depth of thought and experience that go into your posts.

 

[earl]

Unfortunately speaking from personal experience, if you are sued, it doesn't matter if you are in the wrong or the right, or even if the law clearly supports your actions. The simple fact is you quickly rack up thousands of dollars in attorneys fees just to get the case dismissed. And the reason people believe lawyers are parasites on society is they continue to file these cases when the law clearly doesn't support their or their client's position -- a de facto acceptace of the use of the law as a tool of harassment, where "winning" is determined by the amount of money possessed by the individuals involved in the suit. Especially given the fact that the Bar seems to have wide powers to curb this activity and chooses not to use them, well, you can tell my opinion I'm also an Eagles fan

-earl-