Criminally negligent homicide?/Scuba Instructor Faces Charges (merged threads)

[DIR-Atlanta]

I know this is not a laughing matter, but I am somewhat bewildered and amused at some of the responses on this thread.

We ask the studnet to make an Ahhhh sound and listen for it. It is impossilbe to make the sound and hold your breath.

You do realize that having a student make an Ahhhh sound (or any sound at all, for that matter) constricts the airway, right? That would actually increase the chances of an expansion injury, not reduce it. There is no reason to "blow bubbles" or make any sound at all - just maintain an open and relaxed airway, and the increase in gas volume will be eliminated naturally, without any additional effort on the part of the diver (Boyle's Law and all that stuff).

many instructors don't turn out good students and you can't simply generalize it to all [XXX agency] instructors. [...] When I did my IDC/IE, I observed many instructors that should not have been there, but got rubber stamped anyway.

These two statements contradict each other. If these instructors "should not have been there", but got "rubber stamped anyway", then that is an agency issue, since they created, sanctioned, and supported the process by which it was allowed to happen. Good agencies turn out good instructors, period. Not-so-good agencies can turn out good instructors too, but it is usually not directly the result of anything the agency did. It is more due to the individual instructor taking enough pride in what they do to want to do it better than what the minimum standard calls for.

 

[Thalassamania]

Removing and replacing scuba gear in water to deep to stand in is certainly tought in my classes. This is a basic skill and tought in order to free your gear from entaglemnt.

However ABANDONING your gear and heading to the surface without your gear is not taught in my class and I believe it is dangerours. You should try to solve your problems underwater! Only a paniced diver would head to the surface without his gear in case of entagelement.

This exercise is an integral part of most university research diver training programs. Kepp in mind that such programs are much longer, are run by highly qualified (though not always "certified") individuals and it is inappropriate to apply the standards and procedures designed for 20 hour LDS courses to them. It may be similarly inappropriate to apply such standards to some university recreational programs, but I do not have enough data to make that call on this one.

BTW: I can think of more than one occasion where I had a university approved instructor (Diving Control Board approved and Vice President appointed) that I selected (not nationally certified) running my class while I was out of town.

 

[Twistedarts]

When I originally certed in 78 under nasds, ditch and recovery, bailout and a host of other drills were required. It also took weeks! After recently completing padi ow i do feel rather short changed with regards to my education (or lack thereof).
In fairness this only applies to the class/pool portion at a local lds. I did my checkouts with an instructor i felt i could actually learn something from and am continuing my education with him. I never thought there would be such disparity between agencies or incompetency of instructors.

sad.

my heart goes out to the families affected.

 

[PhilEllis]

Jay, I really doubt that the exercise itself had much to do with the accident ... nor with the resultant charge of negligence. Many instructors have been teaching it for decades, and with a high level of success.

I think when the facts become known it will revolve around these issues:

- Was the instructor properly trained to teach this skill?
- Was she following appropriate procedures and safety protocols for teaching the skill?
- Were there other extenuating circumstances that inhibited her ability to teach it safely, and should she have anticipated those circumstances?

In other words, I doubt it's the skill itself that's the issue, but rather how she attempted to teach it.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I would almost guarantee that the particular skill in question had almost nothing to do with the grand jury action. Nor is the approval, disapproval, use or lack of use of this skill of any concern to a criminal grand jury. There have been many, many diving accidents over the years. Some involved utterly stupid actions on behalf of instructors. IT IS VERY RARE that such an accident results in a true bill of indictment being returned by a grand jury. I am certain that the issues you mention, AT A MINIMUM, will be asked at trial.

Phil Ellis


Phil Ellis

 

[ligersandtions]

Some people say that Scuba is inherently dangerous. I do not believe that. In the 70's people dived withoug an alternate second stage. Some people dived without an SPG. they used a switch on the back of the tank to let them know they were out of air. We did not really understand decompression sickness or silent bubbles. Dive tables were less conservitive. In those days the sport was dangerous.

Today we have made great improvements in diving technology to make the sport safe and fun for everyone. I no longer believe the sport of diving should be refered to as dangerous.

Sorry for using your quote for a rant Jim. I mean absolutely nothing personal by it. I just had some things I needed to say.

Dive Safe,
Jay

I haven't kept up with the thread since last night (working on it now....) but I just wanted to address your comment here. Unless you have gills or some other super cool way of breathing in water, I would definitely say that diving is inherently dangerous, no if's, and's, or but's. Sure there are ways to safely get out of many dangerous situations, but that does not mean that it is not dangerous.

There have been great improvements in technology, but a person with the greatest gear and training still has the potential to kill themselves by diving, whether it's negligence on their part, their buddies part, or just an unfortunate situation with a sea creature....inherently dangerous? I think so.

 

[Thalassamania]

I am sure that you are a better diver for learning this skill. And these skills are still taught in sepearte pieces today. The fact remains that a person died performing this drill. Some say he was on drugs, Some say that he couldn't follow directions. None of that really matters. The fact is that threre is a possibilty of death while doing this drill. That makes it dangerous.

And people drown in pools, dangerous. People die in traffic accidents, dangerous. People catch STDs, dangerous. People die taking diver training, dangerous.

Some people say that Scuba is inherently dangerous.

To make that fly you'd have to redefine "inherently" and "dangerous."

I do not believe that.

Nobody cares about your belief system.

In the 70's people dived withoug an alternate second stage. Some people dived without an SPG.

And we suvived ... at least many of us did ... so what?

they used a switch on the back of the tank to let them know they were out of air.

That was called a "j-VALVE."

We did not really understand decompression sickness or silent bubbles. Dive tables were less conservitive.

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

In those days the sport was dangerous.

And it's not now? Can you now breath water and defie the laws of physics?

Today we have made great improvements in diving technology to make the sport safe and fun for everyone.

This has been covered in many other threads, as recent as last week. The consensus amongst those who actually used and can remember a J-valve is that you are wrong.

I no longer believe the sport of diving should be refered to as dangerous.

Again, no one cares about your belief system ... that belongs in the Pub.

 

[Blackwood]

Unless you have gills... diving is inherently dangerous

Bingo bango.

You can mitigate risks with skills training (for example ditching one's gear and safely surfacing), redundancy, etc., but it is most certainly a dangerous (i.e. able or likely to cause physical injury) activity.

 

[jeter]

Nothing, but time has a great deal to do with it. Swimming 15 feet takes a very short amount of time. There is not enough time for CO₂ to build up and cause a desire to breathe.

It should take 30 seconds to ascend from 15 feet.

Theoretically possible, but if that is the case, there are much deeper issues than this skill. Slow deep breaths should be a basic part of any class.

True, slow deep breaths should be taught.

The stress of thinking about the drill? You've never seen a real class have you? By the time the student reaches this point, there is no stress over this skill. It's simply another small step. This skill is not taught the first session, it's 10 - 14 or more hours into the pool sessions.

I am glad you brought up stress. Stress in a student can show up at anytime any where. This is an important fact for an insturtor to believe.

Yes we break the teaching process down into small steps to help reduce stress. But this does not prevent all possibility of stress. We must always be on the look out for stress.

I have seen students complete the pool sessions and not exihbit any stress until the open water dives. I had one student refuse to flood and clear a mask in open water after perfectly performing the skill in the pool. She was afraid the salt water would burn her eyes. I have had many students stress out in wonderful lake travis becuse of the 4 foot visibilty makes them closterphobic.

Stress is a the root of more dive acidents than any other single factor.

Jay

 

[PhilEllis]

While I admit that my "search" ability is limited, I cannot find ONE OTHER INSTANCE where a scuba diving instructor has been indicted for negligent homicide for activities associated with a beginner scuba class. If anyone has any specific case reference on such, I would love to have that information. Thanks.

Phil Ellis

 

[jeter]

And people drown in pools, dangerous. People die in traffic accidents, dangerous. People catch STDs, dangerous. People die taking diver training, dangerous.
To make that fly you'd have to redefine "inherently" and "dangerous."
Nobody cares about your belief system.
And we suvived ... at least many of us did ... so what?
That was called a "j-VALVE."
You have no idea of what you are talking about.
And it's not now? Can you now breath water and defie the laws of physics?
This has been covered in many other threads, as recent as last week. The consensus amongst those who actually used and can remember a J-valve is that you are wrong.
Again, no one cares about your belief system ... that belongs in the Pub.

Thalassamania,

You are correct. Doing anything that exposes one to any risk of injury is dangerous by the strictest definition. Walking down the street is dangerous. You could be hit by a car.

You may not care about my belief system, but ther are those who do. Some of them read this board. I really don't care about your belief system either. It seams a little out dated. Tell me do you still dive with a J-valve? After all presure guages are for wimps.

Dive safe,
Jay