Where the buck stops...

[Nudgeroni]

I would.............. 'Your honour, I could not help said diver given that following him/her down to 450ft would mean certain demise of myself.

Hmmm. If that's the most ambiguous situation you have to worry about, hats off to ya'.

 

[driftin' by]

 

[opalobsidian]

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".

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..."

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...

You make an excellent point JR! No one knows what they will actually do when the poop hits the fan. However, given my druthers, I'd certainly prefer to dive with someone who has the background, training, experience and the deisre to try and help me out, than someone who has stated they would swim away! I'm not so sure I believe that "ANYBODY" would do all within their power to help, life experience has led me to believe differently

I do agree with you that prevention is a huge part of the cure. However, I do not agree that my butt is sorry, I have quite a fine butt for my age and it is fully worthy of being saved, along with the rest of me!

 

[Meng_Tze]

Hmmm. If that's the most ambiguous situation you have to worry about, hats off to ya'.

Is better than my obituary saying: " He tried to help that unfortunate diver. They were sinking to 450ft. At some point during the decent, they both perished "

Or are we talking about litigations where the surviving emergency diver got bent because we both ran out of gas and had to cut (deco) stops short? Guess what.... better bent than dead. I do not believe any judge/jury with some human grain of emotion and logic would condemn me for acting to the best of my abilities resulting in a bent diver. The good Samaritan act does go, no? If not.............maybe I will have to change my views and just pretend I didn't see that emergency in fear of civil lawsuits at the backend.....

As I stated in a previous post. I will do whatever I can, But if it becomes a clear danger to my own safety/livelihood, I am cutting loose. And I expect the same from others should I be in that emergency.

 

[J.R.]

However, I do not agree that my butt is sorry, I have quite a fine butt for my age and it is fully worthy of being saved, along with the rest of me!

FAIR ENOUGH!!! ... as I don't have any 'first hand' point of reference, I'd be more than happy to take yer' word for the quality of yer' butt...

... and would agree that anybody's butt is worth saving... I'd just prefer to do it by giving you all the TLC I can *before* we hit the briny deep...

I think that, as long as we're all (thread in general) discussing this topic in such a philosophic mode, that the point should not be missed that all those little safety thingies on the surface I'm not only helping to ensure my own safety by having you double check my rig... but doing a buddy check on you I'm also adding (potentially) to MY OWN safety by trying to minimize a situation on with your rig that might put me in a situation where I may have to put myself at risk to try to save your "quite fine butt"...

I think that one point that tends to get lost when thinking about buddy checks is that there are two ways of percieving them:

1: I'm double checking your rig to help you ensure you're safety... (or you're double checking mine to help me ensure my safety)... OR...

2: I'm checking my auxillary life support system to make sure that if I get in a jam my buddy's rig is capable of giving me the necessary support I need to "un-screw" my screwed up position...

MOST problems can be resolved before they occur... what I found a bit disturbing on this thread is that the simple point that a buddy check had obviously failed to be conducted prior to the dive got missed in rush to get to the more dramatic question of under what conditions we would or would not choose to be heros... The "hero" would have been the one who said, "No buddy check... no dive." But... that wouldn't have (probably) been viewed as being "cool"...

In the article in question it was noted that "buddy teams wer not required".. ok... that " divers are supposed to follow the dive master"... ok. ... and would obviate the need for a surface buddy-check HOW?

I'll admit that discussing the philosophic questions of what one may or may not do when everything goes "horribly and terribly wrong" is an interesting and very human exercise... but will stand pat on the perspective that nobody really knows what they'll do until the moment comes... and to assume that you or anybody else will rise above themselves and be willing to put their own lives at risk to save some one else's... or yours, is as risky as skydiving without a reserve... or SCUBA without a buddy check.

(... oh... and let's not forget the "IN-water buddy check... just to make sure my "remotely operated emergency ascent system" isn't leaking air from it's 1st stage connnection... or has any other issues that may reduce it's potential future functionality...)

 

[Twiddles]

Wow... all I can say is eye opener. Assuming of course that Im hearing honest opinion:

Minority = Aid if you are able.
Majority = Aid only after you have evaluated the risk. Disregard what you were taught to do in OW and AOW evaluate the situation determine your ability to control the situation and then and only then offer aid.

Solution wear a secondary air supply.

For those of you that would help if able, thank you, know that I will always help if able. If I am unable, I am sorry. For the rest of you I pity you. You may be better trained but somewhere in that process you lost some things. Maybee you feel you gained a better understanding of how you should be, objective, impartial, an evaluator. Based upon the answers I have seen, you have lost more than you gained.

 

[in_cavediver]

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?

To be honest, I care little about negligence etc with a victim at the time I would act. The course of action is determined by whether I can safely assist said diver. If the answer is yes or most likely yes, then they get help. If the danger to myself in unacceptable, well then it will be what it will be. Only at the surface after a happy ending would the negligence vs murphy difference show.

 

[in_cavediver]

Wow... all I can say is eye opener. Assuming of course that Im hearing honest opinion:

Minority = Aid if you are able.
Majority = Aid only after you have evaluated the risk. Disregard what you were taught to do in OW and AOW evaluate the situation determine your ability to control the situation and then and only then offer aid.

Solution wear a secondary air supply.

For those of you that would help if able, thank you, know that I will always help if able. If I am unable, I am sorry. For the rest of you I pity you. You may be better trained but somewhere in that process you lost some things. Maybee you feel you gained a better understanding of how you should be, objective, impartial, an evaluator. Based upon the answers I have seen, you have lost more than you gained.

I think you may have misinterpreted what many have said. I also don't see much difference in #1 and #2. Both seem to help if able right? The second only describes how to determine 'if able'

When prompted with a situation, you have very little time to determine what to do. A well trained, practiced and prudent diver should be able to make a snap judgement about thier ability to respond and act. Even at the OW and AOW level, that should have been taught.

 

[J.R.]

Maybee you feel you gained a better understanding of how you should be, objective, impartial, an evaluator. Based upon the answers I have seen, you have lost more than you gained.

Let me pose another hypothetical...

You run into an emergency situation... personal risk (at some unknown level) is involved...

Scenerio #1: Your 'dive buddy' is your spouse of any number of years... how far would you go?

Scenerio #2: Your 'dive buddy' is an "insta-buddy" you've never met before... your spouse of 'any number of years' (or your kid... ) is sitting topside on the dive boat or on the shore...

These things WILL go through your mind (quickly and probably subconciously... but they will go through your mind)... does your 'evaluation' of the problem change?

One other point of discussion... when the term "evaluate the situation" is mentioned I'd note that we all make evaluations... and we generally make them rather quickly... "Go" or "No Go" decisions are reached without having to go out for coffee and second opinions all the time. If somebody has to talk themselves into a 'go' decision they're *probably* not ready to make smart decisions... and, in my opinion, are probably putting themselves at increased risk...

I think the big thrust in all of this is well summarized by the editors comment that "What I am saying is that, in the final analysis, no one can relegate all the responsibility for their own safety to others."

 

[Nudgeroni]

As I stated in a previous post. I will do whatever I can, But if it becomes a clear danger to my own safety/livelihood, I am cutting loose. And I expect the same from others should I be in that emergency.

I have no quarrel with your impulse for self-preservation, but your attitude towards your legal obligations is cavalier. I am no lawyer, but a fairly straight forward article on the subject in Scuba Diving (http://www.scubadiving.com/article3510) states that the courts have found the refusal to share air is strong grounds for liability, unless there is a *compelling reason* for the refusal. Compelling means that your explanation has to be more powerful than the tears of a widow-- no small challenge, and something I would not like to go through.

If you have the time to weigh the risks before providing air to a dying buddy, then you should take a bit of time to consider what it will be like with a long and expensive liability suit on your hands.

I should also reiterate that current training emphasizes assistance without weighing the risks. If sharing air is optional, than we should train divers to expect that.