Buddy Diving Question

Would you use a buddy system if you could be held liable for your buddy?

  • I would still use a buddy during my diving.

    Votes: 50 72.5%
  • I would stop using the buddy system.

    Votes: 15 21.7%
  • I don't dive with a buddy now

    Votes: 4 5.8%

  • Total voters
    69

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Rick Murchison once bubbled...

In this case I would refer the lawyer to my firm, "Smith, Wesson, Colt & Ruger."
Rick
Thats a good firm, i've used all those partners at one time or another.

However, i prefer, " Sig, Sauer, Springfield and Barrett.:wink:

Seriously, what ever happened to personal accountability? Someone accepts the risk by going diving, gets hurt, and lets see who has the deepest pockets?

I know this is the country we live in but it has got to change. I'm all for people seeking damages when they are wronged but it is seriously FUBAR when it happens as easy as it can, and attack the innocent via the scattergun approach.

I shudder to think of the possibilities if the Johnny Cochrans of the world start pushing this sort of thing.
 
Rick Murchison once bubbled...

In this case I would refer the lawyer to my firm, "Smith, Wesson, Colt & Ruger."
Rick

I have to agree...can't go wrong with them....

The only time I've ever had problems with "bad buddies" have been on charter dive boats where we were placed in groups of 4. Other than that, my buddy and my brother always dive together. Outside of classes...it is pretty rare that we aren't diving together. I guess I'm fortunate in that facet.
 
I've hit the "No, I'll give away the buddy system", because I think it's better to put yourself in danger than to put your life in jeopardy because you're responsible of your buddy's mistakes and behaviour.

At least, you're assuming yourself. I mean, a dive accident in that case (buddy team, buddy accident) could cost you a lifetime of lawyers, jail, legal stuff... and culpability. And this is no fun. :(
 
but I would damn sure be pickier about who my buddies are. I would never go on a commercail dive boat without my own dive buddy with me.

I haven't done any research, but I'm sure that the people who have stated that this has already happened are right. This is too fertile ground for the other kinds of sharks (lawyers that is) to pass up!

:eek:ut:
 
ahhhhh amanda....

not only beautiful.....but wise as well....a dangerous combination!!

taking personal responsibility is rare...especially here in the states...united states that is...we have more excuses than we do problems.....think i will go eat a stack of twinkies and off some dude that has been buggin me! its allowed!! texas STILL has a law that says....if you kill a guy...and he really needed killing...its OK.....im never living in texas again!!..later ...dive safe....

oh...one more thing....you could sue me for calling you beautiful...but the truth shall set me free....!!
 
There are many of us who, while on wreck dives or in poor visability conditions, end up doing the old "same ocean" buddy diving. Also those of us who have a lot of experience or have DM/Instructor certs are always paired up with divers who have a lot less (or sometimes none). We all know that the newbie diver (while trained in the basics and having all the good intentions in the world) should not to be relied upon in an emergency situation. So the reality is that these even if you have a buddy you may still be a solo diver.

Recognizing these facts and finding out that SDI/TDI started a Solo Diver cert, I recently completed the class. The discussions were very enlightning and the course material covered not only the hows but also the whys. I did have to invest in a few additonal pieces of gear as you have to take duplicates of everything with you (I'd never actually taken an extra mask on my dives before) but for those of you who are serious cave and/or wreck divers you should find that you already have all the gear you need.

Does this mean that I will never go buddy diving again? Absolutely not. But it is nice to have a choice when faced with an unknown person being forced upon you by a dive boat operator who is only trying to limit his liability by making you responsible for one of his passengers. Also I like having the freedom to do what I want on a dive whether it's bug hunting or photography. Why should my buddy be tied down to my agenda? Am I being selfish? Probably. If I see someone in trouble am I just going to swim on by? Never.

Bottom line is additional training always makes you a better diver so even if you never plan on Solo Diving, I would recommend taking the course. If you don't have it available near you just wait. I'm sure we'll see PADI, NAUI, et. al. offering a similar specialty soon as they find out how many people are going to TDI for the class.:wink:
 
T-bolt Diver once bubbled...
My question is this: If dive buddies should begin to see law suits over "not performing to someones expectations", would you continue to dive with a buddy

I don't have a regular buddy, and as such, I always am buddied with someone that I met 30 minutes ago. If lawsuits started becoming frequent as given in the example, no doubt I would not be diving as often as I do now - and I would probably be placing ads for a dive buddy. :wink:

Just this past weekend I was buddied (in the usual manner) with this guy visiting the islands for a few weeks - and with him I really saw what it was like to truly be diving with a "buddy". On most of my dives my assigned buddy seems more interested in "same ocean" diving, with me doggedly trailing them around wherever they went.

My dives this weekend were great - I never had to twist my head around searching for him, we had constant communication and he had the sharpest eyes of anyone I've ever dove with - he found all sorts of little critters that I never even noticed.
 
RICHinNC once bubbled...
ahhhhh amanda....

not only beautiful.....but wise as well....a dangerous combination!!

taking personal responsibility is rare...especially here in the states...united states that is...we have more excuses than we do problems.....think i will go eat a stack of twinkies and off some dude that has been buggin me! its allowed!! texas STILL has a law that says....if you kill a guy...and he really needed killing...its OK.....im never living in texas again!!..later ...dive safe....

oh...one more thing....you could sue me for calling you beautiful...but the truth shall set me free....!!

Mmmmm thanks for the compliment... But I don't quite understand your answer... maybe too many "between the lines"... is that ironic ? Please rephrase that in Scholar English LOL :wink:
 
I have done some brief research on this idea that divers have been suing each other for being bad buddies. I searched all state and federal cases in Michigan. I found no reported cases remotely similar to this scenario. I haven't searched outside of Michigan, so maybe there are some elsewhere.

One of the posts above links to a Rodale's site, but there is nothing on the site about this specific issue. Some posters on this thread have said they have heard about such lawsuits. Is this something you have actual knowledge about or is this just another "scuba legend" ? If there has ever been such a suit, I'd really like to hear about it.

The general rule of law is that absent special circumstances you have no duty to rescue somebody in danger, even if you could do so in perfect safety. If you do attempt a rescue, the common law requires that you do so without acting negligently. So some people felt they were better off doing nothing rather than attempting a rescue. As a consequence, some states, like Michigan, have "Good Samaritan" statutes, which exempt a rescuer from any liability except for intentional injuries or gross negligence.

How this shakes out in practice is heavily dependent on the facts of the situation. Examples: If you are responsible for a diver, such as if you are his or her instructor, you have a duty to perform your job competently. You are liable if you don't and that failure causes harm to your diver. If you are just diving in the same ocean, and you happen to be nearby when some diver you never saw before goes out of air, you don't have to do a thing. Legally, not morally. Diving with a buddy is somewhere in between these points. If you buddy up with somebody, you're undertaking to be a buddy and not just take off when you get under water. You have a certain obligation, i.e. a duty, to do for your buddy what a reasonable buddy would do. You have to act as a reasonable buddy would act under the circumstances. If you don't, you could be liable.

This is the same standard you are held to in ordinary dry-land life. You have to act reasonably. If you have a duty to others, you can be liable if you don't act reasonably to discharge your duties.
 
Goodness gracious....nothing between the lines.


And, please explain ....scholar english....I lived in Europe for 9 years and never hear that term..

I simply stated the obvious....you had quite an insightful answer to the situation...to the point I might add.....and...you are also quite "attractive"...based upon your photo.....put those two together and that is quite an interesting...and "dangerous" a combination.

Nothing ironic at all.....merely an observation from one who has been around a while...that is all....my most gentlemanly regards... and respectful wishes ....
 

Back
Top Bottom