Where the buck stops...

[DeepSeaDan]

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.

...you write off the "majority", remember that the competent diver will not ( as Mr. Ferrara stated ) place themselves into circumstances ( like "Pod Diving" ) where they may be forced to reactively evaluate. Rather, they will conduct themselves in a manner well detailed by the many fine divers / contributors to this discussion, thereby minimizing the odds that they will personally encounter the circumstances that Mr. Snyderman found himself in.

There are others like me who, whenever they are diving ( topside or below ) remain on the lookout for possible "situations", while continuing to perform as a good buddy to their partner. I make this reality clear to my buddy prior to entry, & we discuss our potential response actions should an intervention be prudent. Such proactivity need not be the preserve of diving leaders; rather, I encourage all divers to act as such, within the limits of their personal capabilities & limitations. In time one learns to "read" the behaviours going on around them with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Sometimes it is as simple as paying a visit to a diving pair who appear to be heading for problems, having a subtle look into their eyes, & evaluating their response(s) to you. At other times a more aggressive response is indicated.

I much prefer proactive evaluation to reactive evaluation - it makes the odds for a happier ending much improved.

DSD

 

[J.R.]

"... 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.

Hate to disagree with you... but the article does NOT state that "courts have found"... I would quote the article on this:

"Here are some of the actions that would likely result in a buddy being found liable for harm to another diver:"

The article appears to be an opinon piece with no specific citation to any specific court action regarding a buddy's responsibility. ...nor do I see anything that states the qualifications of the author...

 

[Nudgeroni]

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.

Fair enough; when assisting another diver presents a clear and life-threatening danger, then it makes perfect sense to opt for your own survival. The tricky part is that it can be difficult to judge when it is safe to assist another diver. Example: An inexperienced diver approaches flailing his arms around, clearly out of air. He weighs 30lbs more than you. Is this enough of a circumstance to deny air to the individual? Outside of the most extreem of circumstance, I think it is hard to draw the line, so the thought of everyone having a different standard is cause for concern.

 

[nereas]

It looks to me that what all of you all are now discovering is that there is an inherent liability (1) to diving with an unfamiliar or novice buddy and/or (2) to diving in the vicinity of other unfamiliar or novice divers.

This is what solo divers have been saying all along. Of course, I know, this is also controversial as well.

There is nothing better than a great, well trained, reliable buddy, when you can find one.

 

[Nudgeroni]

Hate to disagree with you... but the article does NOT state that "courts have found"... I would quote the article on this:

"Here are some of the actions that would likely result in a buddy being found liable for harm to another diver:"

The article appears to be an opinon piece with no specific citation to any specific court action regarding a buddy's responsibility. ...nor do I see anything that states the qualifications of the author...

Thanks for the clarification. I had no intent to overstep. Here is the quote:

Guilty: Refusing to share air with a buddy, with no compelling reason for the refusal.

...fairly unambiguous to me. I could question the qualifications of the author, but I trust the magazine puts some editorial control over their articles. I would be interested to hear any information to the contrary.

 

[J.R.]

... I think it is hard to draw the line, so the thought of everyone having a different standard is cause for concern.

Yup... nailed it right on the head. But, I'd add that not only does everyone have different standards... everyone also has different abilities... Every dive presents a different set of circumstances too.

... and you're right... "Guilty: Refusing to share air..." would appear to be unambiguous... if it weren't under the heading "would likely result"... rather than "would result"... My reading of the article indicates that the author is trying to make a case rather than citing a case...

 

[Nudgeroni]

My reading of the article indicates that the author is trying to make a case rather than citing a case...

I hear your point. I am stepping into murky areas in which I have no training.

Is there a lawyer in the house?!!:shout:

 

[Meng_Tze]

..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.

I may come across as cavalier to some in this instance. But let me assure you that I am far from that. Compelling reason for me and any real life judicial system would be self preservation in light of pending doom. It can not be that liability is inferred in cases where acting in an emergency in good will. If this is the case then I guess society as we know it ceases to exist. No-one will be helping the other any more in fear of assuming liability for all and any outcome.

There is no legal obligation to render assistance, there are moral and human complications with this. But I do not believe there is a legal obligation. If I am wrong in this last statement, someone please correct me.

 

[Gary D.]

I have only glanced over some of this thread so I don’t know all that has been covered. But I will say for those that think they can go right in and aid a panicked swimmer or diver is asking for trouble.

Every water related training I know of teaches Throw, Reach and then as a last resort Go. There is a good solid reason for that order of rescue.

A panicked person can and often does have super human strength. A little 90# frail old lady can very likely kick royal butt with a 300# power lifter if enough adrenalin gets injected into the system.

If you have a panicked diver it may be best to let them pass out before rendering aid. This is not cold hearted, cruel or a lousy attitude about it, it is a path to survival. Going in at the wrong time can create two victims instead of one.

One reason for panic is that human nature will not allow us to just sit down and die. The panicked person will very often be looking for the closest route towards survival. If you stand in the way of that path to survival you very well may become a victim.

So don’t get the mindset that if another diver is in trouble you ARE going in to help. It may end up that your going in to DIE.

For those that think their buddy can’t panic haven’t seen their buddy on the verge of death.

Gary D.

 

[DavidPT40]

This is definately not a black and white scenario. If I had a pony bottle or spare air, I would certainly give it to a panicked, out of air diver. But what do you do if the panicked diver grabs onto you, knocks your mask off, and attempts to pull you to the surface as fast as he can? Either way, this turns into a nightmare scenario. Even more reason in my opinion, to carry a pony bottle.