Rescue or ???

[greeniguana]

I always show the dive ops my junior open water card from the 1980s. They have no idea whether I have rescue cert or not.

 

[NAM001]

so what exactly is the whole point you are trying to make then?

that you SHOULDNT get a cert?
that you DONT NEED a cert?
that having a cert will get you sued?
that you shouldnt save people for risk of getting sued (cert or not)?

honestly youve been rambling a lot without making a coherent thought

i really fail to see how anyone can argue that more knowledge and training is a bad thing....if you personally dont feel its worth it to you to take the course, dont take it.....but why would you actively dissuade someone else from taking it?.....who cares what they pay and who they pay it to?

more knowledgeable and trained divers should be the goal regardless of how they get there

I may be wrong here on the interpretation but as i see it. training is a good thing. Training is not a necessary thing. When it comes to the view of others,,training assumes a liability. You only hae to look at diving deaths and the persuit of the buddy for failure to do the buddy job. That assumed liability is used against the person trained. There is an assumption that training never becomes outdated and you are always accountable for that raining. The degree that it is used against you makes you avoid any situation that what you may do will be found faulty. Here is an example CPR once said 5 pumps and a breath. now it is different. You stop and render aid and it is noted that you did 5 pumps and a breath and the vic dies. You then get sued for rendering aid that was improper AND THAT SINCE YOU WERE TRAINED YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER. It does not matter whether the suit was successful or not. your life is turned upside down defending yourself and often at quite a cost. Our system is no longer one of reality it is one of perception. There will always be someone to take up that cause. I have seen many times when those trained people suggest leaving the area because something going on where someone could get hurt and it could be determined that a legal obligation to help existed. More than one person shas told me that hindsight has made them think twice regarding the sanity of them taking rescue. They have expressed that they would gladly turn in their Master card and Rescue card if it would erase any and all rescue course completion records. The issue of whether that is a real way to avoid obligation is moot. What is valid is that it is the opinion of some. Much lke fear of flying it is not rational in regards to danger but the fear still exists.

 

[M-Cameron]

I may be wrong here on the interpretation but as i see it. training is a good thing. Training is not a necessary thing. When it comes to the view of others,,training assumes a liability.

where is there any legal prescient for that statement?

You only hae to look at diving deaths and the persuit of the buddy for failure to do the buddy job. That assumed liability is used against the person trained. There is an assumption that training never becomes outdated and you are always accountable for that raining. The degree that it is used against you makes you avoid any situation that what you may do will be found faulty. Here is an example CPR once said 5 pumps and a breath. now it is different. You stop and render aid and it is noted that you did 5 pumps and a breath and the vic dies. You then get sued for rendering aid that was improper AND THAT SINCE YOU WERE TRAINED YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER. It does not matter whether the suit was successful or not. your life is turned upside down defending yourself and often at quite a cost. Our system is no longer one of reality it is one of perception. There will always be someone to take up that cause. I have seen many times when those trained people suggest leaving the area because something going on where someone could get hurt and it could be determined that a legal obligation to help existed. More than one person shas told me that hindsight has made them think twice regarding the sanity of them taking rescue. They have expressed that they would gladly turn in their Master card and Rescue card if it would erase any and all rescue course completion records. The issue of whether that is a real way to avoid obligation is moot. What is valid is that it is the opinion of some. Much lke fear of flying it is not rational in regards to danger but the fear still exists.

so heres the thing.....where is there any documented proof of that happening?

i dont want to talk about guns, but im going to mention it briefly because i have personal experience that is extremely relevant to the situation we are talking about.

of my many hats, i am a professional firearms instructor......and one of the things i hear the most is "i dont want training, because if i need to defend myself, the prosecutor is going use my training to make me look like a highly trained killer".....

the thing is.....that simply just doesnt happen......there are no reported cases of a persons firearms training being successfully used against them in court......for 3 main reasons.

1) a person who is properly trained is LESS likely to actually use lethal force......because one of the main points we drive home is avoidance and deescalation....a common saying is "the best gunfight is the one you dont have"

2) a person who is properly trained is MORE likely to respond to a use of force situation properly.....using a proper amount of force for the situation and reacting appropriately mean you are less likely to have litigation brought against you.

3) no one actually knows what training you have......unless you go around bragging and telling everyone your training, there is no way for police/ attorneys to know the level of training you have taken (unless its state mandated).



the EXACT same scenario applies to scuba training.

1) if you are trained for stress and rescue.....you are LESS likely to find yourself in a rescue situation.....by being able to identify stressed and panicked divers, or noticing something that "just isnt right"....you can address the situation before it becomes an emergency.

2) should you find yourself dealing with an emergency.....you are better trained to deal and react to it....greatly reducing the odds of a tragic situation.

3) should unfortunately the situation turn fatal....how exactly are police and attorneys going to know your level of training?

if there are no documented cases of a persons training being used against them in something as emotionally charged as a shooting........there is no way its going to be an issue with something as benign as a diver rescue course.

the only way your above scenario about CPR would have any legal grounding is if they could prove the person would still be alive if you HAD NOT acted........meaning your attempted CPR is what killed the person....meaning you acted negligently(manslaughter in most states).........failing to save a person who is not breathing IS NOT negligence(manslaughter), regardless of your CPR technique, as that person would die without your intervention either way.

a common misconception is that ignorance is a legal defense.....it is not.

if failing to due CPR properly WAS a crime....then you would be equally likely to be charged whether you were CPR certified or not.

 

[markmud]

Amazing. I've been all over the world and have ALWAYS been asked for a cert card. But, then, I dive from liveaboards, resorts, and public beaches, and always need to rent a tank if on travel. Even at home, there is no way to dive without showing a card and signing something. I suppose if I never went anywhere and filled my own tanks and always dived from an open shore, I might luck out....but I'd miss a lot of spectacular diving that way.

Tursiops,

You must give off a funny odor, or maybe you look suspect, or something. In the last 3 months, I have had three different dive shops fill tanks, and not one has asked for a cert card. There are many places that I dive and nobody cares if I have a c-card or not. Matter of fact, I sometimes don't even take them; like when I got my tanks filled. And they did not know me at all.

Your reading comprehension is lacking. I wrote in my post that you will have to show a c-card to dive off someone's boat or from their property.

It does not matter whether the suit was successful or not. your life is turned upside down defending yourself and often at quite a cost. Our system is no longer one of reality it is one of perception. There will always be someone to take up that cause. I have seen many times when those trained people suggest leaving the area because something going on where someone could get hurt and it could be determined that a legal obligation to help existed.

You get the point. I enjoy communicating with people who have the depth of intelligence to debate things that are abstract, and not lose sight of the main topic. We actually don't disagree with these people in whole, we just have an issue with one aspect of the discussion. An aspect of the discussion that is germane because the OP wrote a paragraph about it.

One of my good friends (and dive buddy) is an attorney and has tried to discourage me from getting the Rescue C card. She warns... too much liability and obligation, and with all the litigation these days, I’d be exposing myself to unnecessary liability if something went wrong.

Butt-hurt is butt-hurt. I love how some take the words of others out-of-context to flame them--I wonder if some of these people have a dog in this hunt.

KWS, I understood the context of your posts on this thread--too bad others could not. This could have been a really good discussion. One point that I don't think you made is that if rescue were real rescue diver training, there would be strict physical requirements for the training, including a full physical with EKG and other tests. PADI required me to have such a physical for my tech 40.

The USCG requires a physical that includes ambulatory minimums for a master's ticket. My CDL had similar criteria but not as stringent. But a rescue credential requires a candidate-filled-out form with no doctor's exam.

Yeah, rescue does require some hard work, and it is beneficial training, but it doesn't create what the industry has marketed it to be.

The marketing and name of the cert is all wrong.

cheers,
markm

 

[tursiops]

I wrote in my post that you will have to show a c-card to dive off someone's boat or from their property.

And what I was trying to gently imply was that your experience is very limited, if you never dive off someone's boat or from someone else's property.

 

[Bob DBF]

You don't need a cert card to scuba dive.

I've been all over the world and have ALWAYS been asked for a cert card.

In the US, and a lot of other countries, there is no legal requirement to be certified to scuba dive, however the industry itself has made it a normal business practice to check a divers cert card before allowing a tank to be filled or rented (Other gear and services can be purchased without that restriction as well as paintballers air tank fills). This is probably reinforced by insurance requirements as may also control your depth limit by certification on a dive boat.

I had no issue getting tank fills where I lived before I was certified, but when traveling I couldn't count on that happening anymore, so I certified OW to avoid the issue.



Bob

 

[dumpsterpurrs]

One point that I don't think you made is that if rescue were real rescue diver training, there would be strict physical requirements for the training, including a full physical with EKG and other tests. PADI required me to have such a physical for my tech 40.

The USCG requires a physical that includes ambulatory minimums for a master's ticket. My CDL had similar criteria but not as stringent. But a rescue credential requires a candidate-filled-out form with no doctor's exam.

Yeah, rescue does require some hard work, and it is beneficial training, but it doesn't create what the industry has marketed it to be.

The marketing and name of the cert is all wrong.

And here's where you and good ol' KWS are all wrong, my friend. What you think the Rescue course should be about is not what it is about. Think about it this way. Medical school is different from first-aid training. Only med students go to med school to get trained to be med pros. But anyone can and should take 1st aid courses at least once, best to do it regularly, - every 12 months or so. In the scuba world, the equivalence of medical professionals are professional public safety divers. PS Divers must go through specific training, a lot more intensive than RECREATIONAL rescue divers. The rescue course should be considered equivalent to 1st aid training, something quick and universal for every diver.

As someone who has worked in humanitarian aids and a TA for 1st aid courses, I'm a firm believer in ensuring EVERY SINGLE PERSON knows how to administer 1st aid. Likewise, every diver should learn basic rescue. That's precisely what's been advertised to me. No one promises that you'll be a full-fledged PS diver after your rescue course!

DMs and Instructors shall also be Rescue certified, just like, say, tour guides and teachers should be 1st aid certified (not required everywhere, but it should be). DMs and instructors shouldn't be expected to know the full PS diving training, just like teachers and tour guides are not expected to hold med degrees.

Btw because of my med conditions i did have to submit a Dr filled med form before taking the Rescue course.

 

[Skulmoski]

Take more, rather than less training, and combine it with more diving. If you have any concern about liability, then move to a different country. We live in a global labour market, so if you like to dive become an expat.

GJS

 

[NAM001]

where is there any legal prescient for that statement?


so heres the thing.....where is there any documented proof of that happening?

i dont want to talk about guns, but im going to mention it briefly because i have personal experience that is extremely relevant to the situation we are talking about.

of my many hats, i am a professional firearms instructor......and one of the things i hear the most is "i dont want training, because if i need to defend myself, the prosecutor is going use my training to make me look like a highly trained killer".....

the thing is.....that simply just doesnt happen......there are no reported cases of a persons firearms training being successfully used against them in court......for 3 main reasons.

1) a person who is properly trained is LESS likely to actually use lethal force......because one of the main points we drive home is avoidance and deescalation....a common saying is "the best gunfight is the one you dont have"

2) a person who is properly trained is MORE likely to respond to a use of force situation properly.....using a proper amount of force for the situation and reacting appropriately mean you are less likely to have litigation brought against you.

3) no one actually knows what training you have......unless you go around bragging and telling everyone your training, there is no way for police/ attorneys to know the level of training you have taken (unless its state mandated).



the EXACT same scenario applies to scuba training.

1) if you are trained for stress and rescue.....you are LESS likely to find yourself in a rescue situation.....by being able to identify stressed and panicked divers, or noticing something that "just isnt right"....you can address the situation before it becomes an emergency.

2) should you find yourself dealing with an emergency.....you are better trained to deal and react to it....greatly reducing the odds of a tragic situation.

3) should unfortunately the situation turn fatal....how exactly are police and attorneys going to know your level of training?

if there are no documented cases of a persons training being used against them in something as emotionally charged as a shooting........there is no way its going to be an issue with something as benign as a diver rescue course.

the only way your above scenario about CPR would have any legal grounding is if they could prove the person would still be alive if you HAD NOT acted........meaning your attempted CPR is what killed the person....meaning you acted negligently(manslaughter in most states).........failing to save a person who is not breathing IS NOT negligence(manslaughter), regardless of your CPR technique, as that person would die without your intervention either way.

a common misconception is that ignorance is a legal defense.....it is not.

if failing to due CPR properly WAS a crime....then you would be equally likely to be charged whether you were CPR certified or not.

this will not perhaps answer your specific but it wi9ll show what somwone will attempt to accuse you on .

Diver Sued for Abandoning Buddy: Undercurrent 03/2004

Your Liability as a Buddy: Undercurrent 03/2002

“Diver’s widow sues his buddy”

Dive Buddies: Legal Liability And You

these were found in no more than a minute. further SB is full of discussions regarding the responsibilities of divers

Again I will say even if there is a suit attempted and it fails,,, you still have to be put through the process and expence of probably successsfully defending. yourself.


Many topics on this board have resulted in discussions that were spawned by comments like
EVEN IF I AM A DM I ONLY GIVE THEM MY OW CARD SO NO ASSUMPTIIONS ARE MADE OF MY ROLE.
It is quickly followed up with the next comment.
IF ASOMETHING HAPPENS ETH LAWYERS WILL GET THE PASSENGER LIST AND LOOK UP THEIR QUALIFICATIONS TO DETERMINE WHO WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE SUIT.

I have never said that I would refuse assisting,, like some are assuming. What I have said is that I understand the hesitance to get involved based o n many articles and threads on various boards including SB. I have also said that it is reasonable to expect anyone to walk away as a self protective bahavior to protect themselves their families, assets and their lifestyles.

 

[Storker]

I understand the hesitance to get involved based o n many articles and threads on various boards including SB.

"Oh damn, someone seems to be dying! I'm not sure I should get involved, I might be sued!"

Said no decent person ever. I can't even imagine contemplating the risk of being sued as a factor to consider if I ever were in a situation where I had to choose between watching someone die, or trying to make a difference.