Could the scuba community have done something more to prevent Guy Garman's death?

[Jax]

I find a disturbing amount of machismo in the male diving community. When I dive, there is an assumption that because I'm AOW, I want to dive to 100 feet. There is an assumption I want to see sharks. It drives me crazy. I tell dive guides, no this is what I want to do and they ignore me. And then are disappointed because I really didn't like their special dive that took me through a channel with a ripping current and absolutely nothing to see.

I wonder how much of this machismo is at work in what we have seen happen not just with this most recent incident but with a lot of incidents in cave and wreck diving. I suppose I could take the attitude that "boys will be boys" and let it go, but it interferes with my enjoyment of the experience. (I started to write sport, but it's not a sport; it's an experience.)

Ehhh . . . . While I agree somewhat, I think that it is more that the "machismo" guys are the show-offs and get noticed. They impress only themselves and others like them. They are actually not the most prevalent, and you can easily avoid them.

 

[Max Speed]

I heard the dive shop is withholding the posthumous 1,200 foot T-shirt to discourage future attempts..

 

[ajduplessis]

But all sold out on the 300ft t-shirts. Strange though as the highest qualified instructor is qualified for 65m.

 

[boulderjohn]

I agree actually with you (I don't "blame" the family at all). I imagine that his family might have had the best chance to stop him (maybe), but they were less knowledgeable and less trained than he was and thus would likely defer to his judgement, they would really want to support him, they understood that the endeavor is very risky but are convinced that if anyone can do it he can (being that close to someone often erases objectivity)... and his string of successes probably encouraged them.

We had a statement from an active member of the entourage that Garman knew more about technical diving "than anyone on the planet." I am pretty sure a lot of knowledgeable dispute that, but the statement showed the state of mind of the people supporting him on that dive. How could anyone who thought that way voice any doubts?

 

[dreamdive]

John, they retracted that since a lot of us objected. Instead they posted this with my response following:

Originally Posted by UrbanMermaid
Note that S.C.U.B.A./Scuba Tech has retracted the statement that Dr. Garman "understood more about tec diving than anyone else on the planet." Quoting Scuba Tech's Facebook page: "That was written in the grips of grief of the outcome of the dive. He did know a tremendous amount, fully understood the substantial risks involved, and went to great lengths to mitigate those risks. To those who were offended by our 'anyone on the planet' remark we apologize and retract it."



I objected to the "understood more about tec diving than anyone else on the planet" in the first place and I also don't agree with this "revised" statement. I would hope that he knew something. But least, he did not know himself! I am dissappointed that as a physician and someone trained in hyperbarics, he presumed to jump from a single successful 800 ft dive to 1200 ft. So he could not "fully understood the substantial risks involved" and thus could not go "to great lengths to mitigate those risks".

This is not just an example of "you don't know what you don't know". There are so many short-cuts and mistakes made - i.e. choice or disregard of thermal protection, dealing with HPNS and arthralgia, what was his ascend strategy - for all we know he dropped so fast that he went past the mark, amount of gas needed...etc, etc, etc.

That does not go with risk mitigation.

However, I do appreciate the retraction of the exaggeration. I don't want to sound like I am trashing Dr. Garman, but I call it as I see it.

 

[rickgillyon]

I imagine a mixture of heartfelt pleas, rational arguments, and screaming, culminating in divorce if there was no alternative.

I imagine I would try to have my wife admitted to a psychiatric institution if the first three didn't work....

 

[boulderjohn]

John, they retracted that since a lot of us objected.

Retracting it on an official site after the fact is nice, but you cannot retract what you were thinking before the dive.

 

[kr2y5]

Do you really think a discussion online is going to change a persons mind about a thing like this? Especially on Scubaboard? When was the last time you saw someone have that lightbulb moment when arguing a point of view on this board?

Not sure what to make out of your post, unclear whose mind you're referring to.

f Garman's, then of course not, but I never suggested that the ScubaBoard community should have tried to influence Garman through a thread of SB, an online discussion wasn't the only way to communicate with people involved in this attempt. If you read the OP, my question was pretty open ended.

If you're referring to the minds of people, who appear to be so upset and uncomfortable against me asking the question in the OP... I'd like to think that this forum is more than just a place where we talk past each other 100% of the time. And probably so do you, since otherwise you wouldn't be here.

It would have taken a personal relationship

And maybe that's one conclusion to carry out of this.

Speaking of personal relationships and being influenced by online content, when we first visited Mexico, my wife has read a ton of stuff about cave accidents, on places like ScubaBoard and elsewhere, and after reading all that online content, became super uncomfortable about the idea of any of us cave diving in the future. I don't know, maybe I'll want to try and convince her to be OK with it, or maybe I never will, the way she feels about it definitely made me pause and hesitate whether I really want to ever progress in that direction. And, people who know me, know that I'm generally a pretty undeterred type myself. So, there. You have a trivial example of an online forum discussion or two influencing someone's willingness to take risky pursuits, with the help of a close relative.

So, if you hear of a stranger with severe alcoholism in physical decline, do you seek him out and intercede?

Generally, of course not, but if said stranger dying from alcoholic disease were to make me, and a lot of people around me, extremely upset, perhaps I would. Perhaps a co-worker would be a better example? Not quite as close as a relative, but someone, whose death would upset you.

The scuba "community" has some amount of controls over divers when it comes to certifications. However, individuals are free to do what they want, with or without the requisite qualifications and experience, and there is no law to stop them.

I agree, but I don't think more regulation is the only possible approach (and personally, I don't think it's the right thing to do).

Same question: Could the [BASE Jumping/Wing Suit Flying Community] have done something to prevent these deaths? It's a moot question and answer especially in extreme sports. . .Again the real & obvious point of relevance to learn from these tragedies, is this: Ultimately, each person who ventures out must make his or her own decisions about how far to go and what point to turn back. .

True, but my understanding is that that community has a different culture, less obsessed with accident analysis, with fewer ties to the supporting science, no people who do such things commercially, maybe I'me wrong, can't comment since I don't know much about it.

We had a statement from an acgive member of the entourage that Garman knew more about technical diving "than anyone on the planet." I am pretty sure a lot of knowledgeable dispute that, but the statement showed the state of mind of the people supporting him on that dive. How could anyone who thought that way voice any doubts?

If there's one conclusion I'd draw from this is that, next time someone attempts something like this, they appear completely undeterred, and the community is 100% certain it's a suicide, the best strategy would be for the community to try to "support" it by getting more closely involved, to have the opportunity to: (a) realize everyone on the team is incompetent, and (b) find a way to at least make them aware of the potential issues. Again, not blaming anyone... just pointing out what might be a more productive approach, given that's been said here so far.

 

[boulderjohn]

Speaking of personal relationships and being influenced by online content, when we first visited Mexico, my wife has read a ton of stuff about cave accidents, on places like ScubaBoard and elsewhere, and after reading all that online content, became super uncomfortable about the idea of any of us cave diving in the future. I don't know, maybe I'll want to try and convince her to be OK with it, or maybe I never will, the way she feels about it definitely made me pause and hesitate whether I really want to ever progress in that direction. And, people who know me, know that I'm generally a pretty undeterred type myself. So, there. You have a trivial example of an online forum discussion or two influencing someone's willingness to take risky pursuits, with the help of a close relative.

I am sure such discussions have had similar effects on a lot of people. Let's look at what might be different in this case.

I have for for several months been working on a theory (and an article) about what makes people become technical divers. Only a small percentage of the diving population does this. When I was first training for technical diving, I was with a training group that did a lot of dives together. We could not help but notice that we had a lot of similar traits and interests. We had a number of conversations about it, offering various theories to account for those similarities. I revisited those memories recently, and with a little more research I came up with a different reason, one drawn from the field of psychology. There is a a concept called Achievement Motivation Theory, which attempts to explain why certain individuals who participate in an activity are driven not only to participate but to excel in that participation.

People with a high need for achievement "work with singleness of purpose towards a high and distant goal," as Henry Murray explained in 1938. They will have had a history of high achievement in a number of activities over their lifetimes.

The need for achievement (abbreviated N-Ach) varies greatly in individuals. My theory is that a diver with relatively high N-Ach will likely be attracted to technical diving and all that it entails. Such a person may well be dissuaded from taking undue risk after a thorough assessment of risks, just as you were dissuaded about undertaking cave diving and just as the vast majority of technical divers are dissuaded from taking undue risks. In fact, I am currently thinking that a rigid adherence to codes limiting risk may be a characteristic behavior of such people. On the other hand, as this article on Achievement Motivation Theory explains, there are a number of different kinds of high N-Ach individuals. I suspect that some will have a drive to achieve that is insatiable and will require a major effort to hold them back.

I suspect that someone considering cave diving and weighing the risks would score pretty high on an N-Ach test (and there are such things), but a person seeking a world record for depth would be in an entirely different category and would be less receptive to contrary advice.

 

[kensuf]

I am sure such discussions have had similar effects on a lot of people. Let's look at what might be different in this case.

I have for for several months been working on a theory (and an article) about what makes people become technical divers. Only a small percentage of the diving population does this. When I was first training for technical diving, I was with a training group that did a lot of dives together. We could not help but notice that we had a lot of similar traits and interests. We had a number of conversations about it, offering various theories to account for those similarities. I revisited those memories recently, and with a little more research I came up with a different reason, one drawn from the field of psychology. There is a a concept called Achievement Motivation Theory, which attempts to explain why certain individuals who participate in an activity are driven not only to participate but to excel in that participation.

People with a high need for achievement "work with singleness of purpose towards a high and distant goal," as Henry Murray explained in 1938. They will have had a history of high achievement in a number of activities over their lifetimes.

The need for achievement (abbreviated N-Ach) varies greatly in individuals. My theory is that a diver with relatively high N-Ach will likely be attracted to technical diving and all that it entails. Such a person may well be dissuaded from taking undue risk after a thorough assessment of risks, just as you were dissuaded about undertaking cave diving and just as the vast majority of technical divers are dissuaded from taking undue risks. In fact, I am currently thinking that a rigid adherence to codes limiting risk may be a characteristic behavior of such people. On the other hand, as this article on Achievement Motivation Theory explains, there are a number of different kinds of high N-Ach individuals. I suspect that some will have a drive to achieve that is insatiable and will require a major effort to hold them back.

I suspect that someone considering cave diving and weighing the risks would score pretty high on an N-Ach test (and there are such things), but a person seeking a world record for depth would be in an entirely different category and would be less receptive to contrary advice.

You need to look up Bob Millot [sic] and Milledge Murphey, both previously with UF. Milledge was a sports psychologist and Bob was the UF DSO. In the 80s/90s they collected a bunch of personality type data on cave divers (myers-briggs). I believe some of their results had been published in a few peer reviewed journals as well.