11 replies to this topic

[lv2dive70]

Been enjoying the Fin topic so much I thought I'd start one myself! Also, the fin topic brought up kicking styles which took me to youtube where of course I got sidetracked on to some other random diving clips, which is what got me on this topic. So it's all related.

I came across the following clip where - long story short - a diver on vacation who happens to be a rescue diver ends up bringing two divers up and sharing air because the two totally sucked theirs down without realizing it as they were well below the depth they should have been at.



Obviously the poster saved these guys lives. One person had an interesting take on it, however, and I am really interested in y'all's opinion on this comment...

Obviously the DM on that dive was crap. You clearly saved the dive shop a lot of paperwork and well done for spotting that there was a problem. BUT - do you not think that you should have acted sooner ? As a rescue diver you really should prevent problems - not cure them. To allow 2 divers to blow their profile by 50' is not acceptable, regardless of what the DM is doing. You were aware of the situation from the start, but did nothing. In my opinion you are not that much better than the DM.

What are your thoughts? Do you agree with the armchair quarterback? I know several people on SD.com are Rescue Divers. I've also heard people who are say they don't show those cards for liability reasons. But then I've also heard if you are rescue diver, you are a rescue diver (with incumbent responsibilities) regardless of whether you've flashed the card. At what point does does the concern/rescue diver override "not sure what is going on" factor?

I am curious as to everyone's opinion on this subject!

[Scubatooth]

I would tell the ACQB to stuff it. Rescue diver is not a professional and doenst have a professional certification, and is not being paid in such capacity. There is no duty to act, the actions the diver made were of his own choosing. He didnt have to go after these two idiots but he did and saved a shop from a multimillion $$ stupidty lawsuit because they werent saved from there own stupidty.

Now if it was me on the boat when i got these idiots to the surface (a big IF i went after them) theres going to be some comments to the idiots and then the DM is going to get a round and some comps as well.

There is a reason why on vacation i bring the lowest card needed for what im going to dive as if im not working in a professional capacity you wont see that professional card. I dont need that headache not to mention im not going to babysit divers for free (yes it happens alot).


Its like im a paramedic and when im not on duty I do not have professional duty to act, but morally or ethically I may, but if i do I can not do any of the advanced life support measures im trained on due to the way the laws are. Sorry you can blame sue happy ambulance chasing lawyers for that one, and why I have to carry 25 million worth of liability insurance for work (paid for by my employer thankfully.

There was a case a while back where there was a car wreck and someone video taped it where there the injured persons counsel got the tape and tracked down the license plates of those that passed and found several first responders (RN, EMT, Paramedic, etc) and sued them for not stopping. Well this lawyer assumed this would be a slam dunk failure to stop and render aid/duty to act. Readers digest version is it didnt go that way and the precendent was set that if one is not on duty there is not a compelling reason for a duty to act to apply due to scope of practice and licensing of EMTs and Paramedics. EMT and Paramedics operate under a Doctors license under a set of standing orders and protocols that allow the, to operate. Just as nurses (broad generalization dont jump me SG and DF) cant do anything without a written doctors order.


Mot that it bears in the case the plaintiff in this case was drunk, caused this wreck and was currently serving time for intox manslaughter for killing two kids and there mother.

[finGrabber]

I agree with scubatooth on this one...a rescue diver is not a professional ranking so he had no duty to respond at all

in fact, the rescue class teaches you to not put yourself in danger to rescue divers. To go to 150' to pull up a 12 year old and his dive buddy is BS. On my vacation dives, I'm usually on 32% nitrox...no way I'm going below MOD to get someone

[Scubatooth]

I agree with scubatooth on this one...a rescue diver is not a professional ranking so he had no duty to respond at all

in fact, the rescue class teaches you to not put yourself in danger to rescue divers. To go to 150' to pull up a 12 year old and his dive buddy is BS. On my vacation dives, I'm usually on 32% nitrox...no way I'm going below MOD to get someone

Bolding for emphasis. Especially that, Im not going to run the near 100% risk of seizing and drowning in that case. At that point there SOL! I may take a lot of risks in life but thats not one im going to raise my hand and volunteer to play roulette with a revolver with 6 rounds in the cylinder

[peterbj7]

I think the "rescue diver" status is a red herring. The rescuer here was just a diver for all legal purposes. He could have been a DM or an instructor and the situation would have been the same. I've been in similar situations, not just here in Belize as an instructor (where I've rescued people diving with another dive guide in front of said guide, who hadn't spotted a situation developing), but also many years ago in the Maldives when I was a DMT, where I and a friend rescued two other divers from certain drowning. In all these cases I helped because it's the human thing to do, not because I thought I had any obligation to do so.

The dive guide in this case is clearly culpable, with the father not far behind. IMO both should have their dive cards revoked until they have proved themselves in further rigorous training. The 12-year old should simply be read the riot act, and made to realise that his life is his to throw away; he must not depend on others.

[Capn Jack]

My usual - "it depends" - on several points -

The DM being crap? If you're the DM - you are paid to have a duty of care - that being said - many times the role on a given dive by a lot of operators is "guide" and if you follow - they'll show you cool stuff - if you don't follow - they don't chase you down - this situation is probably way more common than we want to think whether we like it or not. If you think the DM is always going to watch over you and keep you from killing yourself - you may be disappointed. I don't agree with the practice and if I'm guiding I insist on keeping the herd in my control.

Agree with what was said before "Rescue Diver" in PADI terms is just a card - nothing more - zero duty of care.

If you ARE a professional, and you're on vacation - you do NOT legally have a duty of care. You are not a first responder by trade like a doctor or EMT. Nonetheless, if anything goes south, you will be named in the legal actions following if for no other reason than you carry insurance, therefor the plaintiff's lawyers will think they may be able to collect something. You might as well tell the operator what you are. No one can force you to take students on an instructional dive or pair you with someone as their DM.

How deep would I go with 32%? I firmly believe in not making two victims, but can't imagine how I'd feel being 50' feet away watching someone die. What if they are your friend? Your kid? 150' at 32% is 1.77pp02 - I'll state in writing here, sitting in my chair - bad idea - but in the water in this scenario I'd probably do it. Chamber rides are at 60' on 100% for 25 minutes at a time with seizures being fairly rare (3% sticks in my mind) - yep, you're resting, and not underwater so the risk is lower and the outcome is much better even if you start doing the funky chicken. Bottom line, I won't armchair quarterback the diver in this scenario and say absolutely he shoulda let them die.

Edited by Capn Jack, 10 June 2010 - 12:36 AM.

[scubabjs]

The guy is a trooper, he had zero responsibility to go after those two.

I was watching the video and he had 6 mins of bottom time and 2145 psi when he checked at 111ft. 1750psi at 130ft with no bottom time left, and had been watching them for 3 mins most likely, then he committed to going after them. Last check before he got to 150ft he had about 16xx psi, can't' tell for sure but looks like he had a 5 mins deco, but it most likely cleared on the way up. He perhaps waited a little too long to go after them but he did the math and knew he had the air to go get them and saved their lives.

What I found odd was both of them at the safety stop were breathing on their own regulators. If they went up from 150ft to 15ft in 2.5 mins that was a pretty rapid ascent, but better than having them panic at 60ft when out of air and bolt. The depth gauge shot at the end showed 155ft max depth.

Bjs

[shadragon]

First, the Rescue course is the minimum level of training that all divers should be encouraged to achieve IMHO.

My Rescue course focused on identifying / stopping problems before they occur along with self-rescue techniques and varying victim rescue scenarios to ingrain the STOP-THINK-ACT mode. Those techniques highlighted the "Do not place yourself in danger unnecessarily" rule. Throw a line instead of jumping in yourself; that sort of thing.

Given the subject situation, you do not need to swim down to them. A tank banger or something similar would have worked to get their attention (The viz in the video was more than acceptable to be seen) without putting yourself in danger. If they were even deeper or did not respond to your noises then a flashlight or slate attached to a reel could have bopped them on the head from a safe depth.

The responsibility for exceeding recommended depths or putting yourself in dangerous situations is squarely on the individual divers shoulders. Whether the minimum age bar for divers is set too low today I will leave for others to debate.

Sad to say that most dive ops will underplay such a situation because they do not want to offend paying customers.

[ScubaHawk]

A few random comments. First of all, not everything you see on youtube is real, and our camera man spent a lot of time getting the shots. That being said: The DM should have checked behind him to make sure everyone made it up and over the wall. The team was probably narced and that could happen to any group, you have to keep an eye out.

It is possible to have air in the tank even when a rented analog spg reads 0. They are not necessary 100% accurate.

As for the ACQB the rescue diver seemed to be acting as soon as he saw the problem and as fast as he could. He assessed he situation, assessed the risk then acted. With the exception of paying too much time to his video camera . . . . . . .

[peterbj7]

How deep would I go with 32%?

I'll relatively happily go down to a pO2 of 2.0, maybe as far as 2.5, but no further. That's on air 85 or 109 metres, or on 32% 52 or 68 metres. 45 or 59 metres on 36%. You can work out the feet for yourselves. Assuming of course that my tank holds out! I have dived to 2.5 quite a few times in the past and don't feel too uncomfortable at the prospect. I watched a German instructor who was leading a dive in the Red Sea go down to 50 metres to rescue two idiots, and she was using 36%.

If any criticism can be made of our hero, and I'm not sure this is valid, it can be that he dallied too long making up his mind to act. All that time the divers were getting deeper, into the ocean, into decompression, into everything. I'm also quite surprised how gentle he was with them when he reached them - I would have been pretty unceremonious with them. The German instructor above was pretty brutal with her two almost-victims!

In these circumstances I would always switch the "victims" to alternate air sources immediately if any were available, allowing them to go back to their own depleted but not empty tanks for more independence near the surface. I remember one occasion when all I had was two second stages having to give both to the people I was rescuing, and then buddy-breathing with whichever appeared to have calmed down more. Their tanks weren't completely empty, but they would have emptied before we surfaced.

[scubaski]

Kate P , I ran across the same YouTube about 1 year ago and posted the link . You can click on the thread and compare the comments. Still a interesting video to see and review decisions that were made. Thanks for posting..

http://www.singlediv...a...c=18031&hl=

[uwfan]

I thought this sounded familiar. Just a couple of other thoughts, Rescue Diver is just a card... and it cannot account for whether a rescue certified diver has their own physical limitations, limiting what they can or cannot do, as well as the limits of their knowledge... I don't have tech diving skills to know how deco fits into diving and I tend to dive conservatively. So how much help I would be able to give in this scenario... I don't know, I know I'd do what I could but I would very much doubt I would descend to 150 feet. I don't know if this was a "set up" or not, but if it was real, the fact that three divers didn't have a tragic end to their lives is the take away IMHO. As has been said before, you don't want to add another diver as a victim when there is a scenario of one or more possible victims.