Where the buck stops...

[Papa Steve]

Frankly, that's *crazy talk*, but I think I understand how some of us may have unintentionally led you to think that. If I may have your leave, I will try to explain better.

When a rescue diver sees another diver in trouble, how the diver got in that situation is not relevant. It doesn't matter to me whether the guy was an idiot diving deep with a broken SPG, no redundancy, and no buddy. I will do everything within my power to help, as would every single rescue diver I have ever known. If I can tell he got himself into the situation by being stupid, I may find his irresponsibility reprehensible, but that doesn't matter to what I would do. If I were capable of helping, I would, regardless of who he is or how he got there. That said, if it is *not* within my power to attempt a rescue, I may not be *able* to help. (If someone's entangled and I'm out of air, I'll try to get help, for example.)

The first part of the last paragraph of stevead's post relates to this: He, like any of us, would go as far as possible to try to save *anyone*.

It's only outside the actual process of a rescue scenario itself where responsibility comes in. Frankly, if a diver was diving deep with no SPG, no redundancy, and no buddy, I would be madder than... well, something really, really mad. To put his life in mortal peril was foolish, but to put the lives of those around him in peril was simply inexcusable. If he were contrite and realized how he almost killed himself (and put others in danger by doing so), as the person in the article did, I would do whatever I could to help him become the responsible diver he *needs* to become.

On the other hand, if he denies it was a big deal and would just go on unchanged, my "righteous indignation" will boil over and I will do what I can to scare the neoprene pants off him or get him chased out of the water. I don't mind people who understand risks and take them while avoiding endangering others, but to ignore risks and endanger others is something that makes me quite upset. I don't want him to continue unchanged and end up killing himself or others, but if he obstinately refuses any change, at the very least, I will do my best to ensure that neither I nor anyone I care about are around to become victims to his irresponsibility.Note that nowhere does steve (or does anyone, I believe) say we won't try to help someone who did it to themselves. Don't put the emphasis on the last part, as that was nothing but parenthetical anger at the irresponsible diver. The point is that, short of uselessly thowing our life away, we *would* try to help even the biggest idiot. (If it's a repeat biggest idiot, I'll probably even hate him for being such a [bunch-of-stars], but I'll still do everything in my power to keep him alive long enough to tear into him once he's safe. )

Well said. I'm sure much of the disagreement on this thread has been both sides pushing a point (sometimes too far) to try and make a point.

 

[Twiddles]

For the record I have dismissed oxtox, plumeting to your death from bcd failure, no spg, and even CYA because within the confines of the article ONCE AGAIN they dont apply. You most probably will not know why a diver is out of air when he signals for you to aid him, and frankly at that point IDFM. All of the aforementioned additions to the scenario at hand are exactly why you have convoluted the problem beyond recognition. At no time have I said everyone is saveable. I have simply stated triage at a time when you cannot possibly accurately evaluate a persons state of mind, his ability to hand you your ***, or his ability to accept what you offer without then becoming a nutbar is futile. Worse, you are telling people to not give aid and instead are instilling doubt and confusion as to whether they should help someone who has ASKED for their help in direct conflict with 90% or more of current divers training (prior percentage is based upon an unconfirmed belief that more than 90% of the current divers are AOW or below in training).

 

[ClayJar]

I have simply stated triage at a time when you cannot possibly accurately evaluate a persons state of mind, his ability to hand you your ***, or his ability to accept what you offer without then becoming a nutbar is futile.

And I have simply stated that that statement is contrary to everything taught in Rescue courses.

Your profile indicates you are PADI AOW, which tells me that you were not content to settle for the skill set conferred on you by your OW training. I would suggest that your AOW skill set is itself not sufficient for judging rescue scenarios well, and so, for you, the simple rules are all you can go by. I would also suggest that, just as your AOW training added to your skill set with respect to diving, Rescue training would add to your skill set with respect to rescue scenarios (both in the evaluating and responding aspects).

I would tell a new driver to always follow the speed limit, never run red lights, and so on. For me to tell an ambulance driver that they're a jerk and they're probably going to kill people because they go faster than the speed limits and even run red lights would be rather ignorant of me. The ambulance driver has had far more training and experience driving, and he has things available for his use that a teenager doesn't have. For him to evaluate the sitution, decide that speeding is required, use what he has available (lights, sirens, and driving skill), and even break the cardinal rule of never running red lights is something that, frankly, I'd expect him to do. That said, he also has much more responsibility than an average driver.

(Incidentally, a non-rescue-trained diver can only do what they know, and nobody but you has ever told them not to share air if someone asks.)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

And I have simply stated that that statement is contrary to everything taught in Rescue courses.

Your profile indicates you are PADI AOW, which tells me that you were not content to settle for the skill set conferred on you by your OW training. I would suggest that your AOW skill set is itself not sufficient for judging rescue scenarios well, and so, for you, the simple rules are all you can go by. I would also suggest that, just as your AOW training added to your skill set with respect to diving, Rescue training would add to your skill set with respect to rescue scenarios (both in the evaluating and responding aspects).

This thread may help you understand the value that Twiddles places on continuing education classes ... and perhaps shed some light on where he's coming from here. Additional training is only worthwhile if you go into it thinking you're going to take something away from it.

I also think that a lot of these responses are more an attempt to keep this conversation "interesting" than it is a serious attempt at discussing the reasoning behind Mr. Snyderman's article. Personally, I always enjoy getting dissed by someone with a lot of opinion and very little in the way of practical experience ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Meng_Tze]

For the record I have dismissed oxtox, plumeting to your death from bcd failure, no spg, and even CYA because within the confines of the article ONCE AGAIN they dont apply.

Oh, but I think that by not allowing for multiple instances, by narrowing focus on this particular article, without looking at the bigger picture; one narrows the responses and broadness that open views can bring to such scenarios.

When it comes to saving someone, the only thing that matters is: what are you going to do and to what extend.

 

[in_cavediver]

Oh, but I think that by not allowing for multiple instances, by narrowing focus on this particular article, without looking at the bigger picture; one narrows the responses and broadness that open views can bring to such scenarios.

When it comes to saving someone, the only thing that matters is: what are you going to do and to what extend.

[sarcasm]Stop making so much sense. You should never expand you views to encompass anything more than a single scenario. Didn't your OW training kneeling on the bottom doing skills teach you that? Your mask will never flood unless your kneeling on the bottom! [/sarcasm]

In reality, by confining the discussion to simply the specific article in hand answers very little. Its black and white. If you have air and a controlled OOA diver asks for air, you give it. If you don't have air to give, well you're screwed too.

The fun stuff comes when you have to do the risk/reward analysis in a grey area scenario. Twiddles though, doesn't want to acknowledge that those idea's are a core component to a meaningful discussion. His loss.

 

[Twiddles]

No intent to "Diss" you as a more experienced diver, NW. Severe intent in attempting to keep this discussion on the article not on imagination. Imagination can produce anything, with any result. Discussing the theoretical possibilities of 100s of dive accident scenarioes doesnt help the discussion. It dilutes it into a grey soup where nothing can be answered and only more questions arise. So no, I dont agree that doing risk/reward analysis in grey area scenarios adds to the discussion.

I would say from most of the comments made that the original article and responses to it are not so black and white as some seem to think. However, since we have had so much grey added to the discussion we will probably never know now.

 

[TheWetRookie]

TheWetRookie, I am glad you have learned alot from the posted thread. I am currently in some disagreement with Clayjars negative comments to me and his overall melodramatic comments regarding carrying pain for the rest of your life and mother theresa and spawn of silt. Actually that was a bit frightening sort of where have you gone Clay thing hit me. I am not sure where problem child comes into play or which post I made that indicated to you that I was one.

I have been told I have a rather black and white attitude towards things I tend to cut through bs like a hot knife through butter. If you believe my comments are inaccurate I would love to have your opinion. Earlier you seemed to agree now something has changed your mind, mind if I ask what it was? I have simply been trying to keep things in line with what was stated in the article, about a specific statement and about whether or not it was correct for Dive Training to agree. All this other baggage was added by Clayjar and others *of experience* to bolster IMHO confusion of whether or not Marty was a toad or an incitefull individual we should all aim to be more like. I understand the other point of the article being that we should be aware of issues where blind assistance could also mean killing yourself. I simply believe that THIS INSTANCE isn't debateable.

Twiddles, I owe you an apology for my "problem child" comment, please accept it as I was out of line there saying that. My bad.

Yes I had to a point agreed with that one post of yours though I did qualify it by saying twice that the diver was still in control. If they were panicked or looked liked they were about to lose it, I would probably think differently as I have already assisted in a couple of close calls with other divers in my short diving career. Both turned out fine. I have a wife and children at home that I intend to go home to at the end of the day.

What got/gets me going is your attitude towards experienced divers with a higher level of training and diving experience with the responses that you gave them. I think that you only want to hear one answer and that is yours and you are not open to anything else.

You mention that you have been told that you can be black and white at times, maybe it is time to throw in some colour or at least some grey and reconsider what is being said by the side you disagree with.

 

[GA Under Water]

No intent to "Diss" you as a more experienced diver, NW. Severe intent in attempting to keep this discussion on the article not on imagination. Imagination can produce anything, with any result. Discussing the theoretical possibilities of 100s of dive accident scenarioes doesnt help the discussion. It dilutes it into a grey soup where nothing can be answered and only more questions arise. So no, I dont agree that doing risk/reward analysis in grey area scenarios adds to the discussion.

I would say from most of the comments made that the original article and responses to it are not so black and white as some seem to think. However, since we have had so much grey added to the discussion we will probably never know now.

READ the artical, it is a hypothetical. Have you read it? What the Writer was trying to teach the Diver is that, you need to cover your butt because you never know when someone will refuse to save you. Not that it is right, wrong, sideways.

YOU can't trust me to save your life, YOU have to Cover your ***.

The Title

always learning​

The Lost Boy: A Story Of Panic And Personal Accountability

and the final thought?

One, you can never really know how anyone else, especially strangers, will react in an emergency situation.
Two, you can't 100 percent count on the other person to respond in the way you might need them to. This is why it's important to do everything within your power to never put yourself in a situation where your life depends on the other guy. All of us should do everything we can to avoid putting ourselves in dangerous, yet totally preventable, situations in which we are completely dependent upon someone else's actions.

What do I think abot the Artical? I think he is 100% correct and I agree with the lesson he taught this vacation diver.

You don't know me, you don't know how, when or even IF I will offer you my air. So, get off your butt, quit being lazy and save your own life before you get in the water and CHECK YOUR AIR.

And In rescues, be sure to Evaluate before you make contact, the life you save could very well be your own or the one you love. Think before you act. If you don't it can get you hurt or killed and that is in much more than diving and rescuing. If you become a victom, you can't help anyone, you are now the one needing the help.

And no, this isn't a sit back, relax, watch TV and watch said diver squirm. It takes all of a second to evaluate and make contact or get out of the way.

 

[ClayJar]

Imagination can produce anything, with any result. Discussing the theoretical possibilities of 100s of dive accident scenarioes doesnt help the discussion. It dilutes it into a grey soup where nothing can be answered and only more questions arise.

You know that old story:

A man asked a rabbi, "Why do rabbis always answer a question with a question?" The rabbi pondered a moment and said, "So what's wrong with a question?"

For many of us, questions that are easily answered are elementary. What would any of us do if an unknown diver in control approached us and calmly signaled out of air? I have *no* doubt, even pondering this thread, that each and every one of us would calmly and directly hand a regulator to the OOA diver. The *only* variation would be *which* regulator we'd provide: an octo for "normal" configs, a long hose for DIR guys, our primary for AIR2 divers, or perhaps a pony or something else.

That's the answer, and it is indeed black and white -- actually, it's simply white: that's what any of us *would* do. The discussion on the surface would be interesting, but there isn't a single one of us who wouldn't share air with a calm, controlled OOA diver during our recreational dives. Do we learn anything from that?

Considering only the most basic scenario gives us a simple question with an easy answer, but it provides very little opportunity for discussion and learning. Far more enlightenment is provided by broadening the discussion to the point where there no longer *are* any easy answers. Instead of being able to say, "This is what I would do, because this is what *anyone* would do," you end up having to think, "How far would *I* go for someone, and how far would I expect *someone else* to go for me?"

There really aren't any solid answers, but the process of considering the questions is what makes you a better diver.