What would you report on?

[wedivebc]

First of all, good topic.

I often scan threads involving accidents. I usually cruise past the noise and look for "I was there and I saw this..." Regardless of the opinions and conjcture nothing is as valuable than a witness or a true subject matter expert.

Oh and I was once quoted in a national newspaper article as "wedivebc said ... on scubaboard".

 

[drrich2]

You wouldn't walk into a funeral parlor and start talking crap about the deceased would you I certainly hope not
So then why would you do it here

Couple of issues here; what's said, & how it's said. As I considered your question, I kept coming back to ask what 'crap' was - willful insults (particularly speculative, based on something assumed about the deceased's actions) or simply observations that reflect badly on the deceased (e.g.: opining that a given diver exercised poor judgment & dive execution which likely contributed to his/her death).

I'm not fond of willful cruelty. I expect the candor in Accidents/Incidents threads, and the discussion about broader issues (e.g.: maybe the deceased did this or that, which wouldn't been dangerous), can disturb those close to the deceased. These threads won't rise to the level of compassionate caution/walking on egg shells/candy coating we'd use in a real world discussion with everybody present & family members crying off to the side.

Family looking for closure in the analysis of these threads are apt to be disappointed; how often do we definitively solve a mystery? On the other hand, divers looking to educate themselves about potential dangers & risk mitigation can learn a lot. The latter is emphasized.

Richard.

 

[Bob DBF]

How and when did I make people responsible for other people's emotions
And there is a time and place for free speech and a time and place to shut your mouth
You wouldn't walk into a funeral parlor and start talking crap about the deceased would you I certainly hope not
So then why would you do it here

A&I is not a funeral parlor, and discussing an incident is not talking crap, even though someone may choose to describe it as such because of their emotional state.

This forum is the place for free speech, and the discussions of accidents. The forum is well regulated, but there is no way to stop someone from interpreting posts through the lens of personal grief, and then reacting.

I would advise anyone involved in an accident, or family and friends of a victim to avoid the thread about the accident.



Bob

 

[bowlofpetunias]

A&I is not a funeral parlor, and discussing an incident is not talking crap, even though someone may choose to describe it as such because of their emotional state.

This forum is the place for free speech, and the discussions of accidents. The forum is well regulated, but there is no way to stop someone from interpreting posts through the lens of personal grief, and then reacting.

I would advise anyone involved in an accident, or family and friends of a victim to avoid the thread about the accident.



Bob

Bold added to your post Bob the problem is that's in conflict with people who keep saying witnesses should post information so people learn from the events. If you are involved with the accident there is also an increased chance you are also friend or family member.

It is a very fine line to walk. I would suggest people pay particular attention to and their reputations on the board (Ken Kurtis, Moderators etc) when they say I have been told by a reliable source "XYZ". They are the type of people that actual eye witnesses and people involved in the accident are likely to feel comfortable revealing information to for publication in the threads. That was certainly the case in "our" accident. The information requested was provided but largely ignored in favour of those who were more interested in their own straw horses and preaching from the soapboxes they brought with them.

Seriously tho the available "facts" are so often limited by the event. Often there is a gap that includes the critical time. We can describe what happened up till the separation.. what happened when (if) the body is recovered. There seems to invariably be a window during which the event happened that nobody was actually looking the person. Even in the case of TSandM who we all acknowledge was an incredibly competent safety conscious diver and diving with her extremely competent safety conscious husband this applies. DAN stats reflect this fact as well. Even the best of buddies with the best possible buddy skills can and do get separated. Solo divers in trouble are not likely to have a witness. This means we are often having to speculate on what happened during that window. That is fine as long as people make it clear where known facts end and speculation begins. Kudos to @AggieDiver for the most clear explanation of that topic I have ever seen. I like, Ken Kurtis suffer from being to verbose in my attempt to avoid misunderstandings. Clearly we also both fail to avoid being misunderstood anyway

 

[Littlerayray]

I avoid the A&I forum because I found myself reading a lot of oh this person should have done this or this is what he did wrong and that frustrates me because 90% of the time it's people who weren't even there I was part of an accident I recovered the body I would get angry and frustrated when I would be out and hear people talking about it and how they would have done things differently and how if they were that person he would still be alive and most times I would let them talk but other times I would interject and correct them and let them know how wrong they are and that even a trained professional in S.A.R. would not have been able to do a better job then I did I got complimented by my local chief of police fire and paramedic for my quick response and ability to perform the way I did with no formal training and that chances are they would not have been able to do as good a job as I did since they were not trained in scuba rescues and were unfamiliar with the equipment

This is why I am on my high horse on this topic and so agitated since I've been in this situation I know I'm not the only one which is the sad part

 

[drrich2]

LittleRay:

It's true thinking you'd do a better job in a hypothetical scenario than you think someone else did is speculative. Many of us might be just as dead if we'd been the one.

Perhaps there's some solace to be had that at least these people became aware of a potential problem situation (whether it's really the one that happened or not), and thought about how to resolve it. There's a small chance it might happen to them someday. While they might not've done better before, maybe now they will?

Odds do seem low. The Rescue Diver course taught me I should Stop, Think and Act (rather than panic). Forum discussions talking about preparedness and these discussions drive home a somewhat similar message; give some thought to what could go wrong. And what you can do to prevent or deal with it.

Richard.

 

[Jax]

I see so many people have different opinions on the purpose of A&I.

Some call it a morbid curiosity. That is rude and judgmental.

IMO, new divers are intensely interested to understand HOW people can end up dying. They want to know what it is that they can do, avoid doing, or the mindset that kills.

Some people speculate, because it really is a problem-solving process. Unfortunately, sometime the speculation includes diver error, and in some cases, the consensus of opinion is that the diver was stupid. It happens. Another description for stupid is "arrogant and complacent".

Divers can learn from some of this speculation, and as long as it is labeled as such, it harms no one. It is a learning tool.

Sometimes the lesson learned is that scheet happens, and that can be the hardest lesson to accept. Many want to put the blame on something. Sometimes, there is just a situation with enough actions that tip the odds against the diver.

It is a real and serious problem when people fail to lay out the story and the poor decisions as they happen. The desire to hide the truth when a diver is . . . arrogant and complacent . . . does NO ONE any good - the lesson is there to be learned.

As long as the discourse is factual, and the speculation is labeled as such, one is NOT being disrespectful. That is someone else' filter.

Anyone who has been through Casualty Officer Assistance training (military, for dealing with family members) learns that the family is often reaching for understand of what happened. When someone fails to follow procedures and it results in death, there is often accusations of cover-up and blamestorming. We learn, "we don't know what s/he was thinking at the time, only that s/he didn't follow procedures". It is not up to us to soften anything, simply state the facts. This is, IMO, good advice for this forum.

 

[lowviz]

... I pose this to you all: what would you do, given a real life death in first person? ...

Honor the death by reporting exactly, precisely, what you perceive to be the absolute truth as you witnessed it in the first person.

Nothing more.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

Honor the death by reporting exactly, precisely, what you perceive to be the absolute truth as you witnessed it in the first person.

It's a noble thought but the sad reality is that very, very few dive accidents have an eyewitness to the actual moment of demise. Lynne's death (TS&M) is a good example in that her husband saw her, turned, and then she wasn't there. Figuring out what happened is like assembling a giant jigsaw puzzle and you don't necessarily have all the pieces. Usually the best we can come up with is a plausible or likely scenario and learn what we can from that (which hopefully IS the ultimate goal) but none of it will be 100%.

- Ken

 

[lowviz]

... Lynne's death (TS&M) is a good example in that her husband saw her, turned, and then she wasn't there. ...

And that is all he wrote...