Why ‘everyone is responsible for their own risk-based decisions’ isn’t the right approach to take

[GJC]

I want a checklist on a sticker. It could go right on my wrist slate. I don't see any, though. Are there any good ones for sale, or do I have to get it custom printed somewhere?

This is what's on my sticker. Based on the NAUI SEABAG because that's what I learned first, but it has elements from PADI, GUE, and SDI that I liked and I left out the ones I didn't think I needed.

This is not the checklist that was used for the DAN study, so my checklist may not get the same results that the DAN study did.

It's not copyrighted. Feel free to copy it, change it, start your own or just dump it in the trash.

I take no responsibility for anything bad that happens to you if you choose to use this list or any part of it.

Pete, I would not object if you added this or something like it to the Netdoc Safety Package on DRIS.

I can't believe I'm doing this (again donning helmet and flak jacket as I cower in the bottom of my foxhole with my fingers in my ears)


Buddy Checklist
Site Survey
□ Current, Visibility, Boat traffic
Emergency Plan
□ Out of Air plan
□ Lost Buddy plan
□ Nearest O2
□ Nearest Phone
Activity
□ Activity and Objective
□ Buddy Roles
□ Hand Signals
□ Entry, Exit, Dive Pattern
□ Limits for Depth, Time
□ Air Plan, Limits
Buoyancy
□ Weight Release locations
□ BC inflates/deflates
□ BC Release locations
Air
□ Cam Band secure
□ Valve open, PSI, MOD
□ Regulators work
□ Locate Alternate Regulators
Gear
□ Mask, Fins
□ Knife, SMB, Light, Signals
□ Computer on, O2 set
□ All Gear secured
In Water Check
□ Buoyancy OK
□ Reg breath OK
□ Bubble check
□ Computer/Gauges work
□ Equipment secure

 

[GJC]

A medical clearance does not guarentee the would not be a medical event, so they should not be allowed in the interest of zero diving deaths.


Bob

Agreed, but it gets us heading in that direction and will improve as medical screening improves.

Edit Read your post too fast. Disagree with your conclusion that shouldn't be used. Otherwise same argument could be made that because divers are dying anyway, there is no reason to have open water training or any other cert

 

[dlofting]

Instructors 'push' what's important to them and put very little effort into busy work they don't think will affect much. I remember an early mentor explain to his class "While everything in the book is important, this is just a bit more importanter".

The written checklist for OW diving is a solution looking for a problem. It would solve nothing and take away time from more important subjects.

This bothers me.....as the owner of Scubaboard you carry a lot of weight, whether you like it or not. The checklist may not be the solution for everyone, and you may not like it, but I think you should make sure that people (read novice divers in particular) understand that this is just your opinion.

 

[drrich2]

But you can't set a goal less than zero and say "Yay, we made it we're done" and stand back, do nothing further and watch as more people die.

We can. For a useful analogy consider the U.S. highway system. I live in the south, and a number of areas have a 70 mph speed limit. Including some that, years ago, had a 55 mph limit. I suspect if one were to implement (& effectively enforce) a new federal law making the max. speed limit anywhere in the U.S. 40 mph, highway fatalities would go down significantly. People would have more time to react to spontaneous situations (e.g.: kid runs out in the road), collisions would involve less momentum/force, etc...

But I don't want a universal 40 mph speed limit. Apparently most don't. Even though it would very likely save lives. Even though I, or a loved one, might be amongst the body count we pay for higher speed limits.

That said, some time back I saw a program indicating Texas considered a 90 mph speed limit, but the breaking distance and potential for loss of control of a vehicle, IIRC, were concerns. So there's a point where we act, and a point where we don't.

Actions to reduce accidents have a 'cost.' Could be bothersome (e.g.: mandatory check list, boat crew enforced), expensive and time consuming (e.g.: AOW required for this trip) or outright exclusionary (e.g.: we ban asthmatics, diabetics & people over 50 from diving).

Neither the U.S. highway or scuba hobby fatality rates are going to stay at zero. You can be ever mindful emerging technologies/techniques may offer new, practical, low-cost ways to cut into risk...but that preserving assess to the hobby and reasonable individual liberty means we're going to accept some deaths.

The mindset I'm concerned about comes from observing the influence of some regulatory agencies on business policy. It goes something like this - bad things aren't supposed to happen. When one does, 'something more' should've been done to prevent it. We must now enact a new, burdensome policy with a new requirement so in theory the bad thing won't happen again (it will). If we don't, the regulators will get us. That mindset can be a productive tool in the hands of the wise, or a red tape machine in the hands of fools (or people afraid of regulatory fools).

Richard.

 

[lermontov]

I want a checklist on a sticker. It could go right on my wrist slate. I don't see any, though. Are there any good ones for sale, or do I have to get it custom printed somewhere?

as morbid as it may seem my mental checklist includes "somewhere i the world theres a diver kitting up today who wont return home-make sure its not me"

among other things i kit up in the same order every time- do the same checks in the same order each time - repetition - and if you do change the order for a specific reason its surprising how you get that "ive forgotten something feeling'

 

[GJC]

We can. For a useful analogy consider the U.S. highway system. I live in the south, and a number of areas have a 70 mph speed limit. Including some that, years ago, had a 55 mph limit. I suspect if one were to implement (& effectively enforce) a new federal law making the max. speed limit anywhere in the U.S. 40 mph, highway fatalities would go down significantly. People would have more time to react to spontaneous situations (e.g.: kid runs out in the road), collisions would involve less momentum/force, etc...

But I don't want a universal 40 mph speed limit. Apparently most don't. Even though it would very likely save lives. Even though I, or a loved one, might be amongst the body count we pay for higher speed limits.

That said, some time back I saw a program indicating Texas considered a 90 mph speed limit, but the breaking distance and potential for loss of control of a vehicle, IIRC, were concerns. So there's a point where we act, and a point where we don't.

Actions to reduce accidents have a 'cost.' Could be bothersome (e.g.: mandatory check list, boat crew enforced), expensive and time consuming (e.g.: AOW required for this trip) or outright exclusionary (e.g.: we ban asthmatics, diabetics & people over 50 from diving).

Neither the U.S. highway or scuba hobby fatality rates are going to stay at zero. You can be ever mindful emerging technologies/techniques may offer new, practical, low-cost ways to cut into risk...but that preserving assess to the hobby and reasonable individual liberty means we're going to accept some deaths.

The mindset I'm concerned about comes from observing the influence of some regulatory agencies on business policy. It goes something like this - bad things aren't supposed to happen. When one does, 'something more' should've been done to prevent it. We must now enact a new, burdensome policy with a new requirement so in theory the bad thing won't happen again (it will). If we don't, the regulators will get us. That mindset can be a productive tool in the hands of the wise, or a red tape machine in the hands of fools (or people afraid of regulatory fools).

Richard.

We may not be able to get there tomorrow and we may be able to afford it today. There will be compromises and delays. But to make progress, the goal still has to be zero.

 

[lermontov]

really you have all this on a sticker?

This is what's on my sticker. Based on the NAUI SEABAG because that's what I learned first, but it has elements from PADI, GUE, and SDI that I liked and I left out the ones I didn't think I needed.

This is not the checklist that was used for the DAN study, so my checklist may not get the same results that the DAN study did.

It's not copyrighted. Feel free to copy it, change it, start your own or just dump it in the trash.

I take no responsibility for anything bad that happens to you if you choose to use this list or any part of it.

Pete, I would not object if you added this or something like it to the Netdoc Safety Package on DRIS.

I can't believe I'm doing this (again donning helmet and flak jacket as I cower in the bottom of my foxhole with my fingers in my ears)


Buddy Checklist
Site Survey
□ Current, Visibility, Boat traffic
Emergency Plan
□ Out of Air plan
□ Lost Buddy plan
□ Nearest O2
□ Nearest Phone
Activity
□ Activity and Objective
□ Buddy Roles
□ Hand Signals
□ Entry, Exit, Dive Pattern
□ Limits for Depth, Time
□ Air Plan, Limits
Buoyancy
□ Weight Release locations
□ BC inflates/deflates
□ BC Release locations
Air
□ Cam Band secure
□ Valve open, PSI, MOD
□ Regulators work
□ Locate Alternate Regulators
Gear
□ Mask, Fins
□ Knife, SMB, Light, Signals
□ Computer on, O2 set
□ All Gear secured
In Water Check
□ Buoyancy OK
□ Reg breath OK
□ Bubble check
□ Computer/Gauges work
□ Equipment secure

 

[GJC]

really you have all this on a sticker?

Yeah, just copy it onto a word doc and make the font small enough until it fits on a slate. I'm nearsighted so I can read pretty small print

 

[drrich2]

But to make progress, the goal still has to be zero.

Still not seeing that as a necessity. Implementing all reasonable cost-effective safety measures, while maintaining a good balance with other priorities, seems like the goal (and perhaps attainable). Zero fatalities is a wish. With an unobtainable goal, you can't succeed, you can only 'fail by less.'

Richard.

 

[shawnhar]

Still not seeing that as a necessity. Implementing all reasonable cost-effective safety measures, while maintaining a good balance with other priorities, seems like the goal (and perhaps attainable). Zero fatalities is a wish. With an unobtainable goal, you can't succeed, you can only 'fail by less.'

Unobtainable goals can actually harm progress, because why even bother trying if the target is clearly impossible?

I'm in complete agreement that zero is the wrong target. We could get there today, easily, by not diving But life is full of situations where I choose to increase risk because I deem the reward worth it. Of course the sensible thing is to minimize risks wherever that is reasonable, but every time I drive to work, or go hiking, or travel, or drink a beer, I am increasing my personal risk compared to if I did not do these things. However, I choose not to stay at home cowering in fear...

The right balance between conflicting priorities is rarely to move just one of them all the way to zero.