Right now, the viz in Puget Sound is pretty good, 15' to 20'. Of course, if students crater on descent where there is a lot of silt, it goes to zero very quickly. [.....]Small ratios are critical. Those are the facts with regards to diving around here in general. [....] I would state that even with small rations (1:3), 1:2 is really more appropriate (though I don't think would have changed this outcome). [...] Maybe even 1:1 ratios if the viz is bad enough [....] [....] According to this report, the instructor was with 3 students [link]
I think that viz is the heart of the matter. Around Minneapolis, the viz in lakes used for open-water instruction is typically 10-15' but can go to 3' without much warning if there are storms any time during the preceding few days. In 3-5' even experienced divers can become separated. So the question is how do you teach in that environment, and what is reasonable.
Ratios. The place where I'm getting air teaches open water with a max ratio of 1:2. Typically it's an instructor taking one or two students to the lake. But maybe 1:1 would be safer here.
I've seen classes go out in conditions that I refused to go in the water. Poor judgement in my opinion, but the 'system' puts a lot of pressure on the instructors, and that includes the demands of the students. They have no idea what decent conditions are since they have absolutely no experience. They are kind of at the hands of decisions made by other people, people that they are supposed to trust.
I agree with that. It isn't realistic to expect a student to call the dive based on viz. They don't have the experience to do that, and the instructor/shop is unlikely to respect that decision.
The way you overcome the pressure etc is by making the decision making process objective. Make a standard that you teach at 1:3 below 15' viz, 1:2 below 10' viz, 1:1 below 5' viz, and not at all below 3', then measure it with a spinning plate or something before the dive or when conditions change during the dive. It doesn't have to be the agency that sets standards like that -- they can be done by individual shops or instructors.
Things you can get away with in the tropics can go very very wrong in our conditions. We don't believe a tropical OW certified diver can dive around here until they prove it. That's not to be haughty or 'tough', it's prudent and a safety issue.
What that means in the context of this particular accident is that the transition from pool to OW is more difficult, which has implications for both how the pool session is handled and how the OW dives are handled. When the viz is poor for the OW, it is more important that the students fully develop their skills in the pool.
Where did we lose empathy as dive instructors? Why didn't we learn that some folks can be pushed, some coddled, some at their own pace and some in a classroom setting? [...]Why does it have to be the students fault that they forgot to check gauges? They are students. We as instructors are responsible for everything they do, up to and after a card is issued.
This. Teaching is an art and science of its own. Like guitar teachers and flight instructors, there are too many diving instructors who are teaching not because they like students or like to teach, but because teaching is the only practical way to make money doing an activity they love.
I don't think there is any way to change that, but it is possible to put objective standards in place to try to overcome the safety-related implications.
Looking at the schedule on the Seattle Scuba website, the Confined Water portion of the class is one evening in the pool from 6:30PM to 11:00PM.
I know this sort of thing is allowed, but I think it's a bad idea, and I think it contributes to accidents like this. Pedagogic theory tells us that the skills can't be learned as well in a one-day session as in a two-day session. Weaker skills, combined with poor viz in OW and excessive students per instructor, makes instruction risky.
Entire companies have safety stand downs because they have a global issue with safety. It's all a part of establishing a safety culture instead of giving lip service to safety. The question posed on the first page of this thread was "why does this keep happening?" I proposed that it keeps happening because the culture of safety in SCUBA has been ignored in favor of short term profits
While I agree with much of what you wrote, I don't believe that safety culture is the culprit here. I think it's a lack of objective standards.
I've seen environments with a lack of safety culture. I would characterize these environments as disregarding established best practices and safety protocols. Examples would be: not using eye protection, not using gloves and a respirator when handling toxic chemicals, failing to replace damaged guards, using a damaged ladder, exceeding the safe capacity of lifting equipment. In all these cases there were specific standards that were violated out of apathy, overconfidence, cost concerns, or whatever.
That's not what happened here. You could characterize this accident either as a failure of judgment (because the instructor should have called the dive given the ratios and conditions), or a failure of standards.
I think there should be standards specific to conditions. It's one thing to do the pool session in one day and have a big class in the water in completely benign conditions (viz, swell, current, temperature, etc). It's quite another to do it when conditions are measurably, objectively, demonstrably poor.
She might have tried her best. She might have had very good instruction. She just wasn't able to overcome the results of the 'kick'or what have you. Something very sad and incredibily unfortunate happened here. 
