Woman drowns during training - Hidden Paradise Campground, Indiana

[Ayisha]

What I cannot get my head around is a student with an instructor for a training dive at a 15-20' deep quarry ends up on the bottom, is unable to save themselves for whatever reason, and the instructor either cannot or will not rescue them...

It seems that's where #21 comes in, "dangerously murky water that reduced visibility".

When the victim sank, the instructor may not have been able to see or locate her down below until it was too late.

 

[yle]

It doesn't matter. The duty of care does not lessen as you get closer to the end of the class. Anyway there is no guarantee that the dive would have resulted in certification. The whole point of the dive is to verify that the student has the necessary skills to dive without supervision. In this case, you have the clearest possible demonstration that she did not.

You either misunderstood my comment or you just ignored the context of which it was part.

My comment was in response to another comment that suggested removing and replacing a BCD at the surface was, in itself, dangerous and ill-advised. The point of my comment was to counter that R&R a BCD at the surface is a skill taught in OW class, and there is nothing inherently dangerous about it.

Did the instructor have a duty to care for the student? Absolutely. If the instructor did ask the student to remove and replace their BCD at the surface, was that decision a dereliction of their duty? No.

Something else caused this accident. That was my point. And I will assume that you accidentally isolated the one part of my quote to make it appear that I meant something else.

 

[yle]

You are assuming the BCDs were exchanged at the surface. The 38+ pounds of weight he had in his BCD could very well have been more than a small woman in a wetsuit could keep at the surface. If she did a giant stride off the dock... ugh.

Yes, I was assuming the BCDs were exchanged at the surface. Why? Because that is what someone else suggested could have happened, and I was responding to that suggestion.

If there are alternate suggestions, I can respond to those separately. But it wasn't my suggestion originally.

Since you have proposed the alternate suggestion that the student could have donned a giant BCD that somehow holds 38 pounds of lead, and then walks onto a dock (without appearing to notice that they are wearing 38 pounds of lead) and then does a giant stride with an empty BCD...

I can now respond to your suggestion: that would be ridiculous. Just my opinion.

 

[yle]

Agreed which is where my confusion of this lies. Dive shop/ instructor seems to have a huge losing case.. however, if the Diver was not able to simply release her weight belt and swim to the surface if she got yanked under due to removing BCD and then only thing on was the weight belt.. was she ready to be on her final dive of certification?

Completely agree with you, every word. There are several levels of "this makes no sense" to this incident.

Hopefully the details can eventually be shared so that lessons can be learned and whatever caused this incident can be avoided in the future.

 

[lowwall]

You either misunderstood my comment or you just ignored the context of which it was part.

My comment was in response to another comment that suggested removing and replacing a BCD at the surface was, in itself, dangerous and ill-advised. The point of my comment was to counter that R&R a BCD at the surface is a skill taught in OW class, and there is nothing inherently dangerous about it.

Did the instructor have a duty to care for the student? Absolutely. If the instructor did ask the student to remove and replace their BCD at the surface, was that decision a dereliction of their duty? No.

Something else caused this accident. That was my point. And I will assume that you accidentally isolated the one part of my quote to make it appear that I meant something else.

I was responding only to the sentence I quoted.

I am not speculating on causes (nor commenting on others' speculation) because I don't have enough information to even make up a plausible scenario. I do have some knowledge of the general legal principles at play here, so that is where I am directing my remarks.

 

[yle]

I was responding only to the sentence I quoted.

Yes, I know. The sentence that you isolated from the conversation in which it was contained and relevant, and you made it appear that I said something I didn't say.

By definition, you took that sentence out of context.

Thank you for setting the record straight.

 

[lowwall]

Yes, I know. The sentence that you isolated from the conversation in which it was contained and relevant, and you made it appear that I said something I didn't say.

By definition, you took that sentence out of context.

Thank you for setting the record straight.

Here's your full paragraph to which I was responding
.
To be fair... if it was her last dive of certification, a "remove and replace BCD at the surface" should be a simple skill to handle. It wouldn't be unrealistic for the instructor to assume they could both remove their BCDs, swap, and put them on at the surface.

I don't see how that invalidates anything in my reply.

It doesn't matter. The duty of care does not lessen as you get closer to the end of the class. Anyway there is no guarantee that the dive would have resulted in certification. The whole point of the dive is to verify that the student has the necessary skills to dive without supervision. In this case, you have the clearest possible demonstration that she did not.

We don't know what happened. But the whole "last dive of certification" appears to be meaningless here. Since medical incapacitation seems to have been ruled out, it's hard to imagine a precipitating event that could not have been dealt with by applying the basic skills required of a certified diver. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the student did not yet have the skills mastery required for certification.

Furthermore, even if an instructor were to assume that a student was capable of a particular skill at some point in the class, it's still their duty to verify that assumption and to keep watch over the student.

 

[Kay Dee]

You are assuming the BCDs were exchanged at the surface. This time of year that instructor was probably in a drysuit, and he is a big dude. The 38+ pounds of weight he had in his BCD could very well have been more than a small woman in a wetsuit could keep at the surface. If she did a giant stride off the dock... ugh.

Since you havr posed the alternate suggestion that the student could have donned a giant BCD that somehow holds 38 pounds of lead, and then walks onto a dock (without appearing to notice that they are wearing 38 pounds of lead) and then does a giant stride with an empty BCD...

I missed "wmperrys's" earlier post that gives an exact weight, but I did ask back on page 7 where the info came from that the swaped BC was weighted; and was told that no "facts" are known; hence that was assumption I assumed. But now we have not only was it weighted but an exact figure, i.e. weighted with 38lbs. So again I ask, is this a known fact or just a very speculative assumption?

Or do you "wmperry" know the insructor personally and know that's what he used for weights, or.............?

 

[wmperry]

Another lawsuit against Bottoms Up, this time from DAN in federal court. DAN RISK RETENTION GROUP, INC. v. BOTTOMS UP SCUBA INDY LLC et al

Evidently BU lied about never having been expelled from a training agency and DAN rescinded their policies in mid-December of 2020. So they were operating without adequate insurance.

 

[Divin'Papaw]

Another lawsuit against Bottoms Up, this time from DAN in federal court. DAN RISK RETENTION GROUP, INC. v. BOTTOMS UP SCUBA INDY LLC et al

Evidently BU lied about never having been expelled from a training agency and DAN rescinded their policies in mid-December of 2020. So they were operating without adequate insurance.

WOW