Where the buck stops...

[in_cavediver]

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.

Actually, this is quite an easy decision. Any diver attempting to do an air share is at least somewhat in control, at least mentally. I can handle the physical controls if they can handle keeping mentally in control. A true panic'd diver would not come to you for air, they'd bolt to the surface and refuse equipment. As to how I know this, I have personally seen it, real close and attached my octo.

The scenarios that have me concerned are where I have either a deco obligation, hard ceiling and/or is coupled to other independent failures/problems in my team. Think about this one. My wife and I are 1500' back in a cave. She get terrible stomach cramps. On the very slow way out say at 1400', we see a lost diver who is loa/ooa. Do I share air with them or save my air to ensure my team gets out?

 

[Lucy's 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

Good luck getting that out.
In reality, your exam by the opposing attorney would be a series of short, clipped, yes or no type questions. His job is to make you look mean and negligent. He will. Your attorney's job, on cross, would be to get the facts out of you that make you look better. Your job is to stop thinking you know anything about the law and answer the questions.
In any case, there is no legal duty to help another person. Buddying with them may (may) create one, but that's another can of worms.

For the rest of you, you're all black and whiting it too much. Your all human beings. The default position for those with souls is that you will help your fellow human. You can "evaluate" and begin the helping process at the same time. Make some attempt.
Maybe there is a scenario when you know from the first instant that its way too dangerous to even attempt to help. The vast majority of us will never see that, and are incredibly ignorant to assume what you may see will be that.
I've moved away from a diver in full blown panic after a help attempt was vigorously fought, figuring rationally (and coldly) that I'd wait for that person to pass out before I would continue. She didn't, she managed to find the anchor line above her (and climb most of the way up it). I also know a diver who fought his larger, stronger, panicing comrade all the way up as the guy's helmet flooded at depth. The rescuer kept his hat on his head with the steady flow cranked as the guy fought him all the way.
I've helped when I knew I would fail (brains falling out in my hands and all). You still help.
You're in a dangerous sport. Accept some risk. Not doing so might keep you alive (you'll probably live anyway) but will certainly, if you're not a monster, lead to years of laying awake in bed at night awake with regret.

 

[GA Under Water]

It happens in any situation that has Dead, Dying and wounded. A dead Corpsman is no help to any Marine. The best way to help your fellow is to know when to stop and let the Pros handle it "Currently the Chapter I am on in my Rescue course" Know when to abandon the attempt, Mark the position, and send in the more advanced rescuer with more air, more Non-Deco time.



L's Diver, I completely aggree with you on helping someone that isn't going to make it if they are the only one that requires help. Even if the help is only conforting that person's transition to where ever they are headed. But if there are 3 Victoms and 2 can be saved then the ones that can be saved need to be attended to first and formost.

What is the Most common cause of diver emergancies? Poor Judgment

The first 2 steps in a rescue are Approach & Evaluate

"tri·age noun, adjective, verb, -aged, ag·ing.

–noun
1.the process of sorting victims, as of a battle or disaster, to determine medical priority in order to increase the number of survivors.
2.the determination of priorities for action in an emergency.
–adjective
3.of, pertaining to, or performing the task of triage: a triage officer.
–verb (used with object)
4.to act on or in by triage: to triage a crisis."

It sucks and I imagine that rescuers always ahve a hard time sleeping unless they have fully understood that "you can't save everyone"

In the Artical the author is asked "Hypothetically" what would you have done? And he gave his answer. While sitting there safe on the boat he let the Diver that had the problem know Who's fault the situation was and that in afterthought he would have questioned why that diver didn't CYA "cover your ...." before the dive make dang sure he had a full tank. He taught that diver more than anyone here can probably imagine about "Predive Checks" which was also taught in OWD. And that diver was not so proud as to not admit it was his own fault.

He does go on to admit that

If I saw a diver in distress and felt that I could help, I'd do so. I just hope I never am faced with an emergency that is outside of my ability and training as a first responder. But there are two distinct lessons that stand out to me. One, you can never really know how anyone else, especially strangers, will react in an emergency situation.

"outside of my ability and training"

Remember that and get out of the way, if you don't know how to help, then you are probably blocking someone that does.

Personally, I keep my eye on my buddy more than anything. I have been known to Stop budies and signal overheads that pop out of a wall if they are close. I have caught Items dangeling from insta budies to keep them from loosing gear. But I promise anyone this, I can Squat 400 pounds and if you come groping at my gear paniced and threatoning my life, you will get a 11EEE to the chest until you calm down or pass out. Then I will drag you out safely. In the USA it is legal to defend yourself if you are in mortal peril on land and in the sea.

CYA, CYA, CYA it can't be said enough. If everyone would CYA then rescuers wouldn't be needed. But alas Poor Judgement Reigns in this land of earth and water.

All my Opinion Take what you like and leave the rest.

 

[Twiddles]

Lets see in the last two pages we have at least one lawyer possibly more indicating we should seek council before providing assistance, we have some more straw men, and omg we have the rescue diver again. You know the more I hear from you guys the less I like you. I mean do any of you actually DO any rescues or do you just dream up ways to prove how they were to much risk to undertake? If this simple scenario can lead to so much supposition and conjecture, I mean hey come on, you just like the title right? I mean I dont even know GA Under water but your talk of triage and get the hell out of the way and cover your *** etc just...

I mean you get less than a months worth of schooling and some seriously one-sided factoids (one sided because there are no accurate records of every diver that has offered his air to a buddy or another non-buddy and saved that persons life, only factoids on how often it lead to the divers death) and **** man you can evaluate a diver at 60 yards in a facemask (both of you I would assume) and determine his blood type, his mental state, his risk to you (I can squat 400lbs OMFG LOL) oh and perform triage on him? Guess what I can perform triage too, woohoo, lets see you came to me you made throat slashing gestures, you look a bit more excited then I would like, so f it when you pass out I will pull you to the surface and then revive you with my Rescue Divers resuscitation mask (hope it works like the box shows). Or no wait, I know, you wait there let me go get help, hold your breath till I get back will ya? Wait just one more, umm would you mind signing this waiver on my stencil before I give you my air, if its bad air I dont want to be sued (on the stencil is written CYA like 10 times over, while hes reading it you swim away).

For the record it seems the majority of instructors and rescue divers believe that special training is needed prior to sharing air, training that could of course only be learned by taking another course (LOL, imagine that), so is it a stretch then to assume that your telling OW and AOW students to run for thier lives when approached by an OOA diver because they have not recieved the proper training to determine if they are at risk?? Then why teach it in the first place?

 

[GA Under Water]

Trying to make any kind of arguement you can aren't ya? The CYA is for the diver that DID NOT check his air. He didn't Cover his own butt. Question is, Do you? If you do then you will be able to calmly seek assistance. This includes training, comfort, knowledge and practice. Did this guy do these? Or was it his buddies job to check his air, make sure his rig was set-up correctly, hold his hand while getting in the water, carry extra weights in case he needed it? No, that is every diver's own responsibility. Do you, Twiddles, check your Air or do you expect your buddy or the DM/Instructor to do it for you? I have a feeling you are one that doesn't like to take personal responsibility for your own actions. Therefore, you expect everyone to endanger themselves for your lack of responsibility.

In my post I said, "if you come groping at my gear paniced" that isn't a request for my alt, that is attacking and risking my life. I can't save you if I am a victom at the same time. Instead, we are creating an even worse situation for the next rescuer in line. Maybe you should take an EFR class. You evaluate the situation to make it as simple and safe as possible for everyone involved or you create one that causes more of a situation for more divers.

 

[ClayJar]

I think the disconnect we have here is simply whether you should think before acting.

By my interpretation of the posts here, every diver trained in rescue, from those who have simply taken classes to those whose lives are dedicated to teaching or saving people, all agree that you should think before acting (even if that thinking is basically an instantaneous automatic response to the sitution). How much risk each of us would assume to try to help someone varies, but even those who would attempt to help regardless will still think first in order to best help the diver in peril.

Then there are those who have no training in rescue who seem to be of the opinion that you should not think before acting and that there do not exist situations in which helping a diver in distress is simply not possible.

My view, of course, is that the latter group does not yet posess a thorough understanding of diving from which to acquire a complete view. For example, to dismiss oxtox concerns without comment (calling them a straw man argument) is a demonstrably untenable position, as anyone who knows even the basic fundamentals taught in an entry-level nitrox class can plainly see. With more learning, the missing knowledge required to arrive at a realistic understanding can readily be acquired, but if such knowledge is an anathema to some, there is truly no reason to continue to discuss with those divers -- statistically, there's a decent chance they may never suffer injury or fail to prevent injury, and arguing with them can only be counterproductive.

 

[SteveAD]

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![/QUOTE

The word instabuddy is one of my pet peeves. I have a fairly short of of people I consider my buddy when I am diving. The rest are just people I'm diving with. In order to be considered a buddy, I need to KNOW that this person will be able to take care of me in the event of an emergency. When I travel, I perfer do do so with one of MY BUDDIES. If for whatever reason I am traveling without my buddy and get assigned an instabuddy I have no way of knowing whether or not I can rely on that person. In that case I make it a point to prepare myself as if I were diving solo.

As an instructor I regularly dive with people I know are not yet ready to render aid to me in the event of an emergency, therefore, it is my responsibility to keep myself safe through training, physical conditioning, equipment configuration, and equipment maintenance, and diving in conditions that will not pose challenges beyond the skill of the divers in question.

There is one person responsible for my safety, ME.

There is one person responsible for your safety, YOU.

In technical diving, a key concept is redundancy. If you need a piece of equipment, then you should carry a backup in case it fails. You want your primary to be as good as you can get, and ideally your backup should be just as good. Your buddy is your backup brain.

It seems that some people think that having a buddy who can bail them out is a get out of jail free card against their own responsibility for their own safety, this can not be the case. Each diver needs to take responsibility for his own safety, and accept the consequenses of his own mistakes.

If we're diving together and you get into trouble, I will save you IF I CAN, I will probably take risks to save you, But my first responsibility is ME. I will not willingly die in a useless gesture which is unlikely to save someone who has failed to take responsibility for himself.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

It seems that some people think that having a buddy who can bail them out is a get out of jail free card against their own responsibility for their own safety, this can not be the case. Each diver needs to take responsibility for his own safety, and accept the consequenses of his own mistakes.

If we're diving together and you get into trouble, I will save you IF I CAN, I will probably take risks to save you, But my first responsibility is ME. I will not willingly die in a useless gesture which is unlikely to save someone who has failed to take responsibility for himself.

Seems to me that's a good summation of Marty Snyderman's article ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Papa Steve]

IF I CAN[/b], I will probably take risks to save you, But my first responsibility is ME. I will not willingly die in a useless gesture which is unlikely to save someone who has failed to take responsibility for himself.

Good points and I would agree with most . . . .but would like to add a couple of comments.
Though your first paragraph above may be true I don't think there were any on this thread trying to make that point. My sense is that most on the thread with an alternative point of view were making the case on how they would handle things differently as a rescuer . . .not how they felt they should be treated as an irresponsible buddy. They may have referred to it in passing but their point was what they would try to do to help someone. In an earlier post I myself made the comment that the same character qualities that I would hope would spur me into action to help another would also spur me to discourage others from taking too risky of an action on my behalf.

On your second paragraph above, I don't think anyone is all that gung-ho about foolishly taking their own lives in a useless gesture. My sense is that was not the scenerio in the article. The main crux of the issue for me throughout this thread is partially summarized in your very last sentence . . ."to save someone who has failed to take responsibility for himself". Yes, a level of risk/success should be evaluated (some would take more risk than others, that is part of the debate as well), but how the person got themselves in the emergency situation should not be part of the evaluation. All people are worthy of being saved. I should make just as much effort to save the complete moron as I would the responsibile guy who caught up with Murphey's law.
I think that's one of the reasons this thread has, at times, become heated. Some on this thread have come across, by virtue of their elite training and status, as able to evaluate those worthy of being saved based on the responsibility of their actions, or lack thereof.

 

[ClayJar]

Some on this thread have come across, by virtue of their elite training and status, as able to evaluate those worthy of being saved based on the responsibility of their actions, or lack thereof.

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:

If we're diving together and you get into trouble, I will save you IF I CAN, I will probably take risks to save you, But my first responsibility is ME.

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.

I will not willingly die in a useless gesture which is unlikely to save someone who has failed to take responsibility for himself.

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. )