A Cert Card for everything, including how to tie your shoe...

[D_B]

Bolderjohn ... exactly right on planning a dive , your going to use any and all pertinent information in the conditions that exist in your location and what type of dive it is ... no need to spell it out


drrich .. pretty much

 

[DCBC]

DCBC, at any point during your time while teaching PADI did you formally submit a waiver to deviate from standards?

No, I was told that when teaching a PADI program, I had to follow the standards without any deviation. I was unable to include basic rescue training into an OW program, nor were Altitude Tables (local area) something that I could evaluate on for certification. It was suggested that I do my OW checkouts in the Vancouver area where knowledge of altitude tables would not be required. I was specifically advised that my liability insurance would not protect me, if I deviated from the PADI standards during a PADI OW course.

 

[boulderjohn]

No, I was told that when teaching a PADI program, I had to follow the standards without any deviation. I was unable to include basic rescue training into an OW program, nor were Altitude Tables (local area) something that I could evaluate on for certification. It was suggested that I do my OW checkouts in the Vancouver area where knowledge of altitude tables would not be required. I was specifically advised that my liability insurance would not protect me, if I deviated from the PADI standards during a PADI OW course.

It would be interesting to know the exact details of that conversation that took place nearly a quarter century ago. It would be interesting to know how the thinking within the organization has evolved in the succeeding decades.

Some of it I would probably agree with, and a lot of it depends upon interpretation. For example, what do you mean by"basic rescue training"? The OW class already has what many people would consider "basic rescue training." I just taught the pool session of the Rescue Diver course last night. It begins with a review of the "basic rescue training" taught in the OW course, including cramp removals, OOA emergencies, and assisting a tired diver, including various tired diver tows. Then it gets much more advanced. So where do you draw the line between "basic rescue training" and "advanced rescue training"?

In your many previous posts on this topic, you have singled out surfacing the unconscious diver as the skill you wanted to teach in the OW course instead of the rescue diver course. In view of the unconscious diver's chances of survival after being brought to the surface (somewhere between slim and none and much closer to none), what you are really talking about is teaching basic body recovery rather than basic rescue. For that reason I don't lament the fact that it is not part of the basic OW course. The possibility that a basic OW diver will find an unconscious diver under water and then successfully bring that diver to the surface alive is so remote that I don't mind it being held off for a later course.

I do think that someone should be able to take the Rescue Diver course without having to take AOW, and, that change has already begun.

 

[DCBC]

Is this a fair 'centrist' summary of this thread, or not?

Thanks for the summary Richard. I see the differences as:

1. PADI: Here are the standards teach X, in this order. You cannot evaluate on anything outside of the standards. The instructor is prohibited from modifying this program.

PADI Instructor: Some follow the rules and certify to this standard. Some teach below this standard. Others try to "get around" their own training agency because they believe the student requires more training (inspite of their training agency not requiring it).

2. Other Worldwide Training Agencies: Here are the minimum standards for certification. In some locals, the student will require more training to be certified (use the test of reasonableness). In any event, the instructor is encouraged to expand upon the training presented. The course content and order of presentation is a recommenddation only, the instructor is free to change this as s/he deems appropriate.

WTAI: Some follow the rules and certify to the "minimum standard." Some teach below this standard. Others expand the training beyond the minimums.

My major observations are:

- Instructors from all agencies either do a bad job, do the minimum required (outlined by their training agency), or exceed their agency requirements.
- There is a difference in the level of competence required by each training agency (the minimums);
- That one training agency prohibits changes to their curriculum, while and the other agencies encourage it (beyond the minimums).

I maintain that no one training curriculum in and of itself is sufficient to provide the skill-sets and knowledge required for all local conditions. If you prohibit changes to the training curriculum (universial program), you limit the geographical areas in which a student may be taught to dive safely by following the rules. The only logical approach is to allow your instructors to add to the curriculum for local conditions, to evaluate on all material presented and to make these addition skill-sets and knowledge required for certification.

 

[DCBC]

Some of it I would probably agree with, and a lot of it depends upon interpretation. For example, what do you mean by"basic rescue training"? The OW class already has what many people would consider "basic rescue training." I just taught the pool session of the Rescue Diver course last night. It begins with a review of the "basic rescue training" taught in the OW course, including cramp removals, OOA emergencies, and assisting a tired diver, including various tired diver tows. Then it gets much more advanced. So where do you draw the line between "basic rescue training" and "advanced rescue training"? .

Most worldwide certification agencies include basic rescue training into their OW program. This includes tows and assists, cramp removal, as well as an underwater recovery of a unconcious victim and the rescue of a paniced diver on the surface (although this is not always include within the minimum standards, most instructors add this to their program).

Fortunately for me John, I was diving with someone who was able to rescue me in an unconcious state (OxTox), so I didn't fall into your body recovery example.

Being able to look after your buddy is a basic skill in my opinion. Especially if you teach the buddy system. A good buddy cannot be replaced by redundant technology.

I do think that someone should be able to take the Rescue Diver course without having to take AOW, and, that change has already begun.

It has always been this way with NAUI and the other agencies. I'm glad to hear that PADI is making this change. Hopefully this will occur soon.

 

[boulderjohn]

Fortunately for me John, I was diving with someone who was able to rescue me in an unconcious state (OxTox), so I didn't fall into your body recovery example.

Which is really a different situation.

In an oxtox situation, the diver will continue to breathe while in the sleep phase and can be brought safely to the surface. There have been several such cases. When we train to rescue the toxing diver, we take several steps that are different from what we teach in rescuing an unconscious diver for that reason.

 

[DCBC]

I guess you missed it, my point was that people are recovered underwater and live. It's not always a body recovery, as you elluded to.

 

[boulderjohn]

I guess you missed it, my point was that people are recovered underwater and live. It's not always a body recovery, as you elluded to.

And you missed mine.

An unconscious diver underwater is different from a toxing diver underwater.

Are you advocating the teaching of surfacing a toxing diver as well as surfacing an unconscious diver during the OW class?

 

[DCBC]

And you missed mine.

An unconscious diver underwater is different from a toxing diver underwater.

Are you advocating the teaching of surfacing a toxing diver as well as surfacing an unconscious diver during the OW class?

Yes, I am. Forget the fine points, if either is not brought to the surface, the chance of death is 100%. What about that don't you understand? You continually miss the point. Would you suggest that an OW diver leave him on the bottom and go home?

Once again, people are recovered underwater and live. It's not always a body recovery, as you have elluded to.

 

[boulderjohn]

You just changed your message.

I said that the chances of an unconscious diver being brought to the surface and living were close to zero. I got this from doctors participating on another thread on this topic.

You said it was not true, because you knew a toxing diver that had been brought to the surface.

That is the same kind of reasoning that would be displayed if I said that monkeys had tails and you contradicted me by saying that you had seen a gorilla with no tail. A gorilla is not a monkey, and so it has different characteristics. A toxing diver rescue is not an unconscious diver rescue, and so it has different characteristics.

Now you say that neither one has a chance if they are not brought to the surface. I agree, but that is not what I said.

Let me try to repeat myself so clearly so that not even you can pervert the message.

1. You said that PADI did not allow "basic rescue training" in OW classes.

2. I said it did allow 'basic rescue training" in OW classes; in fact, it has almost every item on your list of basic rescue skills.

3. The line has to be drawn between basic rescue skills and advanced rescue skills. You and PADI disagree on where to draw that line.

4. Where you draw the line includes surfacing an unconscious diver as a basic rescue skill. I said I did not mind it not being considered a basic skill for OW because the likelihood of an OW diver finding an unconscious diver, surfacing the diver, and having the diver survive was so very, very remote.

That was the entire point made. You responded with two straw man arguments. (A straw man is an argument that you feel you can win, even though it is not the one your opponent was actually arguing.)

Straw man number one: A toxing diver can be brought to the surface. I agree, but it was not on your list of skills for basic OW, and it is not what we were talking about.

Straw man number two: A diver left at the bottom will certainly die. Again, I agree, and my original point included that concept, but you have read it carefully to understand that. I said that the chances of survival were so remote that it was an acceptable decision not to include it in OW training.