Where the buck stops...

[MikeFerrara]

It was not an insult. You have neither the experience nor the dive education to have come to an understanding that there are times when a diver can refuse to help and be justified in doing so. It's a rather cynical view of things, and not having considered that decision means you're still innocent of having made it. With a few exceptions (people like DSD and TSandM, for example, with whom I'll never compare in some ways), most people would likely reach a limit as to how much risk of their life they'd take to try to save someone.

If you want to reference only the actual situtation in the article (a diver in a group, apparently nowhere near panic(?), who comes to you for air), sure, I'll donate an alternate (while being prepared to clobber the guy if he tries to bolt). Still, isn't that kinda missing the entire *point* of the article, which is to think about what you'd do, both by considering the hypothetical diver who won't/can't help you as well as considering whether *you* would/could help were you approached.

I've tried to reply with what insight I found through Rescue. It forced me to think about those hypothetical situations from both sides, and it certainly broadened my imagination. I'd hoped that my being open about one easily understood reason someone *could* be forced to choose between themselves and a rescue attempt would provide context by which you could more easily see that the black and white of always trying to help everyone is not nearly so certain the more you learn.

As I've said (probably belaboring the point), I openly admire educated, experienced people who can put a diver in peril before their own safety in every situation. They know the risks, and they choose to put the safety of others before their own safety, but I admire them so much because they are the few. It's easy to say "I'd always help, and to not help is murder!" if you're unspoiled by knowledge and experience. To know full well the mortal peril you may face and still be able to say, "I'd always help, even though I may not require that of others." is certainly another concept, altogether.

I'm not quit sure you took away from the rescue course what you should have. Giving an air source to an OOA diver is a good way to help keep them avoid panic. If you want to make them panic for sure...just don't give them air and watch them squirm.

If they are already in full blown panic, you need to control the situation. That may mean keeping your distance for a time, which, isn't the same as abondoning somone in trouble.

 

[Garrobo]

What stvead said, except for the "big and strong".

 

[fisherdvm]

I read the article, and had mixed feelings about it. We've talked about this issue here before. The principle is that it is never good to create a second victim, and it IS possible for a panicked diver to cause someone else's death. The strength and irrationality of panic is something that's easy to underestimate unless you have either experienced or observed it firsthand.

I would also have to think hard on this one. If the guy is so incompetent, that he was noted to forget to check his air 3 previous times... He might put me at risk.

When I was in the pool with my son on Sat, we worked on OOA drill, and I told him how he has to be in charge if I were OOA.

If he is to share air with a bigger idiot, who is strong enough to rip his reg out of his mouth and bolt to the surface, he might put my son at risk for an emboli. I am not sure if I would want him to share air with a stranger.

In the same way, if the OOA diver was observed to be incompetent, and you are near your NDL (toward the end of a dive), why risk putting yourself at risk for DCS if the panic diver might force you to make a rapid ascent with him. The question is, can I control him, or am I going to be a victim too.

 

[Gil57usa]

Anyone get and read Dive Training Magazine? If so what is your opinion on the post entitled "The Lost Boy: A story of panic and personal accountability?

In brief, the story revolves around a divers comments "Marty" about a diver who went out of air on a dive Marty was on; "To be honest, unless I am absolutely certain that someone I have never dived with before and who I have never discussed any emergency contingencies with is under TOTAL control and not panicky, or unless I am certain I can physically control the person or drop their weights, I would be reluctant to put myself at risk" by providing them with my alternate air source. The person "Marty" is refering to a group dive where your not specifically buddied with the diver in need and also refers to the fact that the diver made his bed by not checking his air prior to dive on three seperate occassions prior to submerging. Marty felt his obligation to himself and his family would outweigh his obligation to a dying diver who was not known by him or his buddy.

Worse the editor of the magazine appears to agree with "Marty" since he wrote an editorial on the article entitled where the buck stops. In short he commends marty on his honesty and agrees with his statements. (Sort of funny how he quotes Truman in the buck stops here but fails to see how that quote conflicts with his opinion, I take responsibility for everything that happens under my command even those things I dont directly control is what President Truman was stating).

I was actually a bit unnerved to discover that I would be evaluated in a life or death situation to determine whether I was safe to help. In fact if you refused and I asked would you not be guilty of murder (assuming of course I didnt just take your alternate after you refused)? Whatever situation leads to an emergency is often not known at the time of the emergency, to claim that you have the right to decide whether or not to prevent a persons death when you have the means to do so is so totally wrong in my book. I can see the "implied risk" but the response rates right up there with playing god. Any attempt to offset your responsibility to a person at risk of dying by implying a greater risk to yourself is just attempting justification.

This is truely a subject that is difficult to take sides on. While it is very easy for people to say that you should do whatever it takes to rescue a troubled Diver, as it is often the case, reality sets in when the chips are down. Is it really fair to ask a new OW diver to risk his life to rescue another when his/her own skills are still developing and perhaps they can barely take care of themselves? Or should every Diver, no matter what their experience, risk all to attempt a rescue? Not everyone has the training to assume the increased risk and task loading that comes into play during a rescue. During my years as a Public Safety Diver, I have Trained long and hard to develop situational awareness and the skills neccessary to effect a Rescue. The one thing that is always drilled into our heads in the Fire Service, and this also applies to anything, is risk vs. benefit. Sometimes it is a sad truth, reality as it were, that for whatever reason, a rescue cannot always be made. One example; What if you are beathing nitrox and your Buddy has a problem and drops below your MOD? Would it not then be suicide to follow him down? Sadly, nothing more than a harsh truth. In reality, only the Individual can make the determination at that moment, what they are willing or capable of risking to save another. Until you are actually in such a situation, don't judge others for their actions.

 

[Flightlead]

I totally agree with the author of the article. YOU have the responsibility for yourself. I will help you if I can, but I will not put myself in undue risk to do so. The caveat to this is if I am acting in a paid leadership position such as dive master or instructor. Then I have an obligation to act. As simply another diver, whether rescue certified or not, there is no obligation to act, moral, legal, or otherwise. It has been demonstrated time and again the dangers of assisting a panicked and out of control person. Faced with that situation at depth I would simply wait for the person to lose conciousness then assist them to the surface safely and begin the rescue.

 

[Nudgeroni]

A lot here has been written about the dangers of providing assistance, and the drive to provide assistance, but only a few have posted regarding what I see as the crux of the article in question:

Does a negligent diver have the same moral standing as a responsible diver in the case of an emergency? Is there the same obligation to assist, even if it is dangerous to do so?

It really has little to do with the specifics of diving; guides climbing Mt. Everest are facing the same dilemma when they find desperate, poorly trained climbers in need of assistance.

It's a tough nut, because those most trained in rescue tend to have a strong sense of personal responsibility; and one of the first rules of personal responsibility is to avoid being negligent. When faced with a negligent individual who has created their own emergency, the trained rescuer is torn between his/her urge to assist, and anger with the negligence. Throw into the mix a real risk of injury to all involved, and we have a big fat moral dilemma on our hands.

The important thing I got out of the article is that every diver needs to know where he/she stands in this dilemma. As for what is right *for the sport* and what our expectations are of each other, I'll take the view that it doesn't matter. What does matter is that, as a community, we make a choice and stick with it. Student divers need to know what to expect if their negligence results in an OOA. Teaching them to expect assistance and then denying it would be a crime.

One thing to consider is the legal angle. I wouldn't want to defend myself in court by explaining that the danger of the sport justifies my refusal to aid a negligent diver.

 

[Meng_Tze]

One thing to consider is the legal angle. I wouldn't want to defend myself in court by explaining that the danger of the sport justifies my refusal to aid a negligent diver.

I would.............. 'Your honour, I could not help said diver given that following him/her down to 450ft would mean certain demise of myself. The fact that said diver did not check gear before commencing the dive, in my opinion, was the sole cause of descending beyond limitations of training, breathing gas and experience. I did not feel it was justified in my mind to sacrifice my life along with said diver due to their inability to stay within well established guidelines of safe diving. I do not feel I should be held accountable for their negligence'

You can quote me on that one

 

[opalobsidian]

Hmmmm, I think the next time I have to be assigned to an insta-buddy, I will ask them where they stand on this issue before I dive with them!

 

[Papa Steve]

This has been a good thread. I have learned a lot. The discussion has, at points become heated, but hey, iron sharpens iron.
My wife and I are new to diving. We are continuing to stay in the water and continue our formal training. We have completed our first two specialties. We both agree that to be a competent, contributing member of a dive party we should at least complete our AOW. I plan on at least obtaining Master Diver, mainly for the Stress and Rescue course. Until then, and as we grow, we will continue to dive within our training and comfort limits and make sure to communicate those limits plainly to those we are diving with. What I have learned from this thread seems to validate our approach to our diving and our training.
I stated earlier in this thread that if I were diving with any of you I would commit to do everything I could to rescue you in an emergency. I think some considered my comment Naive. Though I'm new to diving I have not been totally unexposed to emergency/high stress situations. As others have said, every situation is different. None of us know for sure what we would do in a given situation. I have been through a few so I believe, with a fair amount of confidence, that I would respond if required. True, the experience and training is not there yet to necessarily respond perfectly and successfully but hopefully to respond properly if I am diving within my current limits.
Several on this thread have responded to the importance of proper knowledge, training, and experience. I've learned a lot from your posts and it's very much appreciated. This is a very smart group. But though some have hinted at it, I do not believe that knowledge, training, and experience in diving/water rescue answer all of the questions. They appear to answer the "what would I do" and "how I would do it" but they don't answer the "why". Which, in my opinion, is just as important. For some who may want to discount its relevance, I think it's already assumed, though not understood. When someone says there are people in their life they would do anything for in a rescue situation yet others they would have to measure the risk, they're responding to the "why" question. This is ultimately a theological/philosophical question that likely couldn't be answered in a rescue class anymore than rescue diving could be taught in a church or college philosophy class. But it does apply. Some's view of the world may see me as an image bearer of my Creator and thus having infinite worth, while others may see me as an under trained meat popsicle just waiting for my place in the Darwin awards. Those two examples come out of how one answers the “why” question.
Bravery, honor, courage, and sacrifice are not taught in the classroom. They are qualities of character that, for the most part, are born out of how we respond to the "why" questions of life as well.
Ultimately, I would aspire to be the type of diver who has the training, knowledge, experience, as well as the world view that would take the risk to pull you out of the jaws of death. Paradoxically, those same qualities that would inspire me to take risk for a fellow diver would also prevent me from asking for the same. I would want my buddy to have my back, take some risk, and maybe even push the envelope to help me but I would not want him/her to take foolish risks on my behalf . . .though I would willingly die to save my wife/child I would not want them to die to try and save me.
I guess, at the end of the day, If I had to choose, I would want a buddy who was moderately trained that shared my values and answers to the "why" question than a buddy that was highly trained but did not share any of those values.
My apologies if this got a little too esoteric. I hope it adds to the value of an already great discussion.

 

[J.R.]

Hmmmm, I think the next time I have to be assigned to an insta-buddy, I will ask them where they stand on this issue before I dive with them!

Well... hopefully their answer will match up with their actual actions IF a situation arises...

I still think folks are missing the thrust of the the issue...

I don't doubt that ANYBODY who dives does so with firm surface belief that if a situation occured underwater they would do all within their power to help out an individual in distress... to the best of their ability.

But the fact is that... given the variables at play, what counts is what actually happens in the moment of crisis. It's easy to sit back and run hypothetical scenarios... and, in all probability, helpful. But *the moment* is a whole different thing... and the only reliable measure is not "what you think you'd do"... but "what you did".

There are any number of stories where people *didn't analyze* the situation but simply dashed in out of reflex to do what the felt needed to be done... we hear the tales of those who survived... they're called heros. What we don't generally hear about is those who dashed in and didn't survive... we don't want to hear about them... they're called 'dead'.

Trying to analyse a disaster *before* it happens is an exercise in futility... you CAN deal with the 'gross' elements... but the peripheral issues will always be grey... and, as they say, "The devil's in the details..."

I also think that this mentality that others have some fundimental responsibility for us is a very dangerous mindset. It has the potential of allow us to let our guards down because we don't focus on saving ourselves first by having the proper focus on safety... or by believing that we are somehow safer than we actually are.

I'd much rather see people focus on doing proper buddy checks, having pre dive plan discussions, coordinate their hand signals, agree on HOW they're going to dive the dive and then be willing to follow the dive plan... than I am in debating how one is going to deal with the aftermath effects of ignoring the preventative measures.

The salient point in the story, to me... was that *Marty* didn't check his air... obviously they didn't do a buddy check either. So... who put who at risk? What happened after is a consequence...

Wanna' save a life? Don't ask your insta-buddy how he feels about coming to save yer' sorry butt... ask how he feels about proper pre-dive prep... if your buddy isn't inclined to cooprate... strike one...