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

[boulderjohn]

What exactly changed in case #2 such that now that the result is not my responsibility?

Nothing. Your instructor would not be blamed for it, and your instructor should not be blamed for it.

Once again, please do not be guilty of black/white thinking. Each situation is different. In some cases, a victim may be primarily or even completely responsible for a tragedy. In some case, an outside factor is completely responsible. In the overwhelming majority of cases, different factors with different levels of responsibility are involved. We engage in fallacious thinking when we want to assign all blame to one or the other in all cases.

 

[GJC]

Assume these two cases:

1.) I am not a diver. I hit the internet. Irder a compressor, dive gear and a bunch of books. Not necessarily in that order. Start reading and teach myself to dive safely on my own property. It's entirely possible and I think not breaking any laws. Might have trouble diving from boats or pkaces with controlled entry or getting fills elsewhere, but that's not the point.
The point is: Most would likely agree that the result of my actions is my own responsibility. Should I fail, my decendents might think they may have a case against the state for not having a law forbidding that or against an internet business or against the authors of the books in my bookshelf, especially the ones with notes as evidence I read them... But hopefully the courts would see it as my sole responsibility. Wouldn't you think so?

2.)
I get trained by a scuba instructor. Get my OW cert. and go kill myself while diving out of the envelope I was trained for and fail to deal with what I encounter correctly.

What exactly changed in case #2 such that now that the result is not my responsibility?

A lot of the previous posts talk about personal responsibility (and liability).

I would like to steer this thread back to Science:

If you take 100 people and make them do what is described in 1.) as above. I think that you would expect that a number of those people are going to die if they continue to dive. This happened before there were dive certifications.

If you take 100 people and make them do what is described in 2.) as above. I think that you would expect none of them to die if they continued to dive. Today, the death rate of scuba divers is actually pretty low.

Personal responsibility is a factor in preventing accidents, but it is not the only factor we should be focusing on to prevent accidents. And it may not be the most important factor that we can do something to change that will make a difference.

 

[Schwob]

@boulderjohn & @GJC :

Please don't get me wrong and please don't put me in a box I do not belong in. I am plenty good at achieving that myself.
I am all for the science. I am definitely seeing that good, methodical, quality enforced instruction is much more beneficial than self instruction and that on statistical or systems level there always are better options for improvement of the whole concept then blaming someone.

I merely asked my question as simplified and pointed as I did because it seemed to me that some of the thread's postings really seem to assign responsibility away from the individual. That's very different from looking into how things could be improved.

I happen to be a strong supporter of personal responsibility, but I also design and improve technical systems, so of course I never just rest with assigning blame. The line of arguments that wants to look into causes and eliminate weak spots is -perpetually- a good one. Yet, if I choose to pilot a plane with a bad cockpit layout and crash it, I may still be responsible for it even so a better cockpit layout might have prevented that crash. I still chose to pilot it the way it was. And it certainly is worthwhile to look into how to avoid these crashes on a systems level... No contest.

And on average, as observed by me, it is certainly worthwhile to improve the teaching in the scuba industry. Most definitely no contest. But even if I felt it all was very good already, it certainly would be wrong to stop improving it.

But in the end, especially as an adult, I do feel strongly about my actions and their outcome being first and foremost my responsibility.

 

[lermontov]

The solution was to put a small wheel on the landing gear level and moved spatially to a different location on the combing so that it wasn't automatic to raise the gear instead of the flaps.

so i guess the first step is to identify what is causing scuba deaths- some issues arent that easy to rectify by gear adjustments

Dive Organisations are in many ways like religious sects - the dive system are developed over many years -some divers have a revelation that we need to do such and such better or differant so they start their own group, then theres another splinter group and on it goes. The system although not perfect is i think adequate- always room for improvement -the constant evolution and refining of training is important - resistance to change is like religious dogma

A system put in place creates parameters for the new or inexperienced to operate inside of and will hopefully maintain a certain level of safety until the said person become more proficient and hazard aware.

The ease for a student to jump from one course to the next means that they will be still 'inexperienced' for greater time period because the tasks become more complex and decisions are more dire . Compare this with say operating a simple machine were repetition is required rather than making judgement calls

So we have the organization that have gathered the knowledge and created systems
we have instructors that impart that knowledge
we have pupils
and we have profit

All must play the part in order to achieve the right result, if one of those parts isnt working properly then it needs adjusting, in real life not all instrucotrs are doing a good job just like not all students are adept at absorbing new skills. In fact not all students care about having great dive craft some just want to dive twice a year on vacation. Or some hot headed youth that knows best and wont listen. Yes they go into the higher risk category but you cant control that unless instructors refuse a pass and cert card

taking responsibility - yes im old school and im responsible for me and will take ownership of that - the problem arises if say the system doesnt cover an important skill or the insrtuctor doesnt teach it or the pupil doesnt do it

When humans are involved theres flaws- it will never be perfect and it will never be risk free and in the case of a death or injury there will usually be a proportional responsibility - thats why insurance works

 

[boulderjohn]

Yet, if I choose to pilot a plane with a bad cockpit layout and crash it, I may still be responsible for it even so a better cockpit layout might have prevented that crash. I still chose to pilot it the way it was.

So, if you are fully aware that your plane has a dangerous flaw and you choose to dive it with that flaw knowing it could kill you, then you are responsible. I agree with that.

What if you don't know there is a flaw? What if experts you trust have assured you that there is nothing wrong with the plane? Everyday across America pilots head down the runway with planes full of passengers, all of whom believe there is nothing wrong with the plane because they trust that qualified mechanics have inspected the plane and pronounced it fit to fly. Are the pilots and passengers at fault if the plane crashes because of an undetected flaw?

 

[The Chairman]

@The Chairman, interesting comment that I misrepresent you with and yet you think I am looking for an OSHA view of the world

You’ve presented nothing to make me feel differently. An OSHA system is exactly what will happen when you take away personal responsibility. It's nigh inevitable. It's the logical conclusion of your proposal even if you can't see it.

So you have changed the system which your students are exposed to. That system is not available to other people.

Sure it is. I've even offered to teach any instructor how to do this for free. Three have taken me up on that offer. Just contact me via PM.Don't have the time or inclination? Just read how I and any number of others teach this. It's not rocket science. More like submarine science. You can do this.

In this case, the errors we are talking about are the result of both individual mistakes on the part of the person making the error and flaws in the system. Assuming all errors are the fault of the individual means you can never improve the system.

I'm not sure I used the word "fault", John. However, it's the responsibility of every diver to recognize danger, analyze it, correct it or call the dive. Yes, I saw issues with traditional teaching methods and was one of the earliest proponents of fundamental change. Even when people disbelieved it was as simple as I made it out to be, I kept refining how I teach. Again, it draws back to showing some personal responsibility to be safe. I'm not sure why you or Gloc seem to dismiss or minimize this basic tenet.

Can anyone list an operation or organization that specializes in recruiting new divers and have the diver leave their initial open water/recreation level training with proficient skills?

ScubaBoard. I first learned to dive in 1969 and my "instructor" never got in the water with me. I learned again just before the turn of the century and actually got a cert. BCs, SPGs and Depth gauges made diving much safer and more fun and I could again get gas fills. Then I learned real safety right here on SB. I even got the germ of the idea of teaching while neutrally buoyant right here. I can't remember who it was or how fleshed out it was... but I made it my own and a number of other instructors have done the same thing. Some who thought I was lying at the time now know better and are great advocates of the practice as well. While we're not an agency and don't want to be, we've done more than our share in advancing safety and yes, even personal responsibility in regards to diving. I'm proud of that and every moderator and user (past and present) can take the same pride. WE did it together.

No system or agency can replace you taking personal responsibility for your dives. Read the book. GTS! (Google that Sh*t!) Explore ScubaBoard. Get some mentoring. Know your limits. Evaluate your limits. Honor those limits. Only you can prevent your diving accident. Live it. Breathe it. Be it.

 

[Bierstadt]

I remember reading one of Jack Welch's (the famous GE CEO) books on leadership when I was in college. A few things stuck with me. One of them was that personal integrity was not merely a positive attribute, but a necessary intangible to play the game of business.

I feel that taking personal responsibility for one's safety as a diver is just such thing. We can be as progressive as we are able to improve training and emphasize safety in the diving community, but without divers taking personal responsibility for their own safety it's just trading one set of failure modes for another.

Additionally, for all that diving is communal - you dive with a buddy or a team, by and large - the diver's path is very individual. Even lonely, in a way. When we do below we are in our own world, with multiple timers ticking away on our life. And we do it repeatedly, because that is the nature of diving. It's different from grade school, or commercial flying, or military aviation, or nuclear reactors and emergency medicine or most other things one might care to name. That is not to say that there are no lessons that we can draw from those other fields. There are. But unlike everything else, diving is A) a hobby, and B) done alone.

No doubt you will immediately counter that diving is not done alone. But think to your own experiences. How much of human connectivity is reliant on talking? At the interpersonal and technical levels divers work at, most of it. Signals and pads are all very well, but they are never more than prompts for briefed or learned concepts. How many times do you go check your spg and find your buddy out of sight? (that's 15' in my area). Diving is so often just you and your thoughts, with other stuff thrown in. Buddy, boat, fish, life support, gas, more fish... you are not going to lose yourself in a friend's story at 100'. Outside of niche gear, it's just impossible.

And on top of that, your diving experience is uniquely yours. Oh sure, it's cool if you have a buddy that does the same dives and the same training as you, but how many people have that? No, the probability is that your path is your own. Learn in books, learn online, learn in a class or in a discussion, experience dives from shore and dives from land... it all adds up to something unique. There is no solid structure to change or refine in diving. After OW and maybe AOW every person is going to be different.

The alternative is somehow forcing a common set of standards for all certifying agencies and banning outside learning from consideration in diving. That is asinine.

So by all means, let us gather as much data on diving disasters and near-disasters as we can. Let us enable those of our community with the appropriate skills to examine the data and recommend ways to improve our best practices. This is only sensible. But let's not pretend that we live in a simple world with only one agency through which divers will dive only as they are trained and never do anything else so long as we get the training to be perfect. I am not saying the OP is claiming this. But I do suspect he would prefer if this were the case. (My apologies if I am off-base.)

Anyway, big thread, lot's of opinions - anything actionable to recommend?

My suggestion would be for every OW graduate to get a "The Things You Don't Know You Don't Know But Can Kill You" -style pamphlet linked to a free download so the grads can get a bird's eye view of risks as they progress as divers. There are similar content books I believe but not many OW grads are going to take the initiative to go find, buy, and read them. Also there is the "anything I need to know PADI (insert agency name) will teach me" attitude to further reduce the level of dive book buying.

 

[The Chairman]

@Doppler should chime in here. I certainly hope he does.

 

[drrich2]

I'm trying to grasp how this approach is to actually be applied in the real world. If someone wants to study scuba incidents and fatalities with an open mind for system solutions to substantially reduce risk, I doubt anyone's got a problem with that.

But let's say you get some publicly recognized entities, DAN, Scuba Board, maybe PADI & SSI, to issue an annual public report with your breakdown and recommendations.

And in the 'real world,' nothing much changes. We still see dive op.s taking 'OW-only' divers to 130 feet at Belize's Blue Hole, recent OW-graduates go on guide-led dives at 80+ feet, people don't do buddy checks to some idealized standard, whatever. Basically, your recommendations aren't changing what you wanted changed.

Then what do you do?

And when do you quit? There will always be occasional dive fatalities. It's often said Scuba is a fairly 'safe' sport (I don't recall numbers; I've been under the impression we're not dying like flies compared to other outdoors activities like hiking, skiing, etc... Does anyone know differently?). If you adopt the attitude 'no life lost is acceptable,' then you run the risk of piling on regulation after regulation, year after year, hence the fear of 'OSHA-itis,' if you will.

So what are you proposing be done in terms of real world action?

Richard.

 

[GJC]

I'm trying to grasp how this approach is to actually be applied in the real world. If someone wants to study scuba incidents and fatalities with an open mind for system solutions to substantially reduce risk, I doubt anyone's got a problem with that.

But let's say you get some publicly recognized entities, DAN, Scuba Board, maybe PADI & SSI, to issue an annual public report with your breakdown and recommendations.

And in the 'real world,' nothing much changes. We still see dive op.s taking 'OW-only' divers to 130 feet at Belize's Blue Hole, recent OW-graduates go on guide-led dives at 80+ feet, people don't do buddy checks to some idealized standard, whatever. Basically, your recommendations aren't changing what you wanted changed.

Then what do you do?

And when do you quit? There will always be occasional dive fatalities. It's often said Scuba is a fairly 'safe' sport (I don't recall numbers; I've been under the impression we're not dying like flies compared to other outdoors activities like hiking, skiing, etc... Does anyone know differently?). If you adopt the attitude 'no life lost is acceptable,' then you run the risk of piling on regulation after regulation, year after year, hence the fear of 'OSHA-itis,' if you will.

So what are you proposing be done in terms of real world action?

Richard.

Au contraire. I have noticed more than a few changes over the years.

When I learned to dive:
BCs were a new thing for diving
J valves were standard and SPGs were optional
Octos were a new thing and very few people actutally had one
Dive boats did not carry oxygen and may or not have a VHF radio on board
There was no such thing as nitrox for recreational diving
There was no such thing as a Tec or Cave diving course

More recently I have noticed defibrillators on dive boats.

One thing that I think could be acted on is a standardized pre-dive written checklist. DAN published a research article showing using a written checklist reduced the number of incidents during a dive. It should be standardized and included in basic open water courses by all agencies. It should also be preprinted and included on every dive slate and multi-gauge console.