Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park

[Edward3c]

PADI came out with new standards for drysuit use. Standards that in no way protect the diver or instructor. But they do allow operations and the agency to weasel out of responsibility when shady, unethical, and immoral shops and operations force instructors to use the max ratios.

I was talking to a UK PADI operation yesterday. They are now considering their agency affiliation as the they understand the new drysuit rules mean they have to teach OW in a wetsuit before they can do a drysuit course. Totally unsuitable for Scottish conditions.

 

[VikingDives]

May I make a suggestion? Instead of paying them to use their name on your website (basically what is going on), when someone calls asking about a course from them ask them why they want that brand. Inform them that you can offer a certification equal or, morel likely, better course through your other agency. Explain to them that the agency name on the card is not nearly as important as the education they get.

That's basically what I do, and I did not renew this year. The problem is people look for "PADI certification" online and being able to offer that drives traffic to my website. Since we've only been in business for 2 years, we don't have an existing customer base, so Google and word of mouth are how we get new customers, but not one person who's asked about the difference has opted for the PADI class once they've talked with me.

As far as leaving an agency because it doesn't align with my beliefs, I can't think of an agency that I agree with 100%. I disagree with the PADI and RAID approach that skill X must be done on dive Y. That works great with big classes, but the ones I teach, not so much. I disagree with SEI for the Tech bad/Nitrox Bad attitude. TDI/SDI, standards are too lenient. GUE/UTD, being anti-computer, the Z system... I am not the agency, and I will always tell students, "The agency says this, and I have to train you this way, but here's why I disagree." Doing that might get me sued, and not doing that might get me sued too.

I've been on the receiving end of claims and suits before (non-scuba) and I'm pretty well versed in the system. I am not going to let hypotheticals and what-ifs run my life. I try to do the best I can for my students in every class, but my best today is much better than my best 2 years ago.

 

[Wookie]

Depends on how you view the right to legal counsel. My father did a brief stint as a criminal defense attorney, one of his clients was clearly guilty of statutory rape (she was pregnant with his child) yet he still defended him because he deserved the best legal defense that he could get despite the fact that his client disgusted him.

And there you go, making my point about morals and lawyers.

 

[Manatee Diver]

And there you go, making my point about morals and lawyers.

I'm not sure I did. The legal system is a complex system that is very hard to navigate without training and experience. Everyone deserves the best help that they can get.

Even the those put on trail at Nuremberg had a legal counsel.

In the case I mentioned my father got his client a plea deal that resulted in a few years in prison. Which was the best that he could hope for. Less than the maximum, but still pretty significant.

 

[Wookie]

I'm not sure I did. The legal system is a complex system that is very hard to navigate without training and experience. Everyone deserves the best help that they can get.

Even the those put on trail at Nuremberg had a legal counsel.

In the case I mentioned my father got his client a plea deal that resulted in a few years in prison. Which was the best that he could hope for. Less than the maximum, but still pretty significant.

When I ran a liveaboard dive boat, I could have set my personal feelings and principles aside to give my divers an experience that many of them might have preferred.

Instead, we were known for being extremely rigid with our boats rules (which were “industry standards”) and if you did stupid things like running out of air or violating your dive computer or tables, you were not allowed to dive anymore, or had to sit out your omitted decompression in accordance with your agency/computer rules. This was all agreed to long before the customer boarded.

I could have copped out and allowed divers to break those rules, because “the diver had paid for vacation and deserved the best vacation I could offer”, but that went against my moral code, and I had 23 other folks on the boat that had also paid for a vacation who hadn’t violated the pre-agreed upon rules.

Many divers, friends IRL, friends on ScubaBoard, well known personalities wouldn’t dive with me, which was fine, I went places no one else went, I had all of the clients I wanted or needed, so I didn’t need to put up with clients that I felt would violate my moral standards.

The difference is, I don’t feel that I offered the best liveaboard experience that could be offered, as your dad thought he was the best ever criminal defense attorney. Like David, I had all of the clients I wanted, they would follow my rules, and I didn’t need to chase business I didn’t want anyway.

 

[Subfiend]

What I was trying to ask @Subfiend was, is simply being a member, in his mind, grounds for not taking a case, i.e. someone like me who has a number but doesn't teach PADI courses, or is it that he won't represent someone teaching PADI classes?

My firm and I will no longer represent or advise PADI members in any way. We will not defend lawsuits, advise on how to avoid litigation, draft liability waivers, assist with the sale of boats or leasing of retail space, give divorce advice or advise on import-export issues, etc. We do not want to be in a position where we may say yes to helping with this legal issue but not to that one.

I don't think we are going to change the world by stating or enforcing this rule. I just want to change my world, and Matt agrees. There are plenty of lawyers in the United States. The sun will still come up tomorrow. The diving industry will still be in a worsening insurance crisis. We can have a whole new discussion about the insurance crisis, especially for PADI members, but that is not the purpose of this thread.

 

[Manatee Diver]

The difference is, I don’t feel that I offered the best liveaboard experience that could be offered, as your dad thought he was the best ever criminal defense attorney. Like David, I had all of the clients I wanted, they would follow my rules, and I didn’t need to chase business I didn’t want anyway.

To me that is an apples to oranges comparison. You are applying industry standards that keep people safe, and if their vacation is ruined they are out maybe a week of the life and a few thousand dollars. And they would have to break a rule for you to apply them.

A criminal court case can literally cost someone their life or a significant portion of it. And a civil case can cost their entire livelihood. And you can find yourself subject to the system even when you've done nothing wrong.

And I'll be honest I respect both positions. I believe that everyone has the right to representation even the clearly guilty/liable, but I also believe that the people that do it should do it of their own free will and belief in that right of representation.

 

[Subfiend]

I'm not sure I did. The legal system is a complex system that is very hard to navigate without training and experience. Everyone deserves the best help that they can get.

Even the those put on trail at Nuremberg had a legal counsel.

In the case I mentioned my father got his client a plea deal that resulted in a few years in prison. Which was the best that he could hope for. Less than the maximum, but still pretty significant.

You are absolutely correct on all these points. Lawyers have an ethical duty to provide the most competent legal representation they can to their clients. But they don't have any duty to accept new clients, unless they agreed to do so when they took their job, like when they were hired as a public defender.

I have wonderful stories about the results I have achieved for past clients (three years probation and a $20 fine for someone who held the county SWAT team at bay for five hours with a .357 Magnum comes to mind). But I have also been to the Titanic five times, been shot, legally driven 170 mph on a tiny road through the wilderness, etc., etc. I don't need another reprehensible client story to make my life complete.

 

[Manatee Diver]

You are absolutely correct on all these points. Lawyers have an ethical duty to provide the most competent legal representation they can to their clients. But they don't have any duty to accept new clients, unless they agreed to do so when they took their job, like when they were hired as a public defender.

Don't disagree, my point was mostly around the idea that representing guilty clients doesn't make lawyers morally dubious.

 

[L13]

Don't disagree, my point was mostly around the idea that representing guilty clients doesn't make lawyers morally dubious.

I disagree. It is a dirty job, Kink of like the divers that do maintenance at sewer plants, but someone has to do it or our legal system looses its legitimacy. Morally upright and honorable lawyers can and should defend the guilty.

That doesn't mean that there aren't many reprehensible lawyers out there. Judge them by the honesty and validity of their tactics, not by their clients.