Diver Death in Cayman

[rsldonk]

That depends on how high you hike. Even injuries sustained hiking on a "walk-up" mountain are not covered by many insurance policies.

Yeah, that was probably a bad example. How about just walking down the street?

 

[letterboy]

Yes, because there is a greater chance of flood. Insurance companies are out to make money, so if something requires a special type of insurance coverage and is excluded from other types of policies, that means that whatever is excluded and requires that special insurance is rated at a higher risk of loss. The idea of insurance is to bring in enough premium payments to cover any of the expected losses that they will sustain. By charging an extra premium for dive insurance and by excluding diving s from many standard policies, that means that diving is rated as a higher risk to insure than say hiking (or whatever else does not require special coverage).

I think I misunderstood what you were saying. . . I have been reading post in the Pub to long today. . . I thought you were essentially saying diving was not safe and we shouldn't be doing it, obviously I am wrong since you have not been burned at the stake yet

 

[letterboy]

Yeah, that was probably a bad example. How about just walking down the street?

drive by shootings

 

[rsldonk]

I think I misunderstood what you were saying. . . I have been reading post in the Pub to long today. . . I thought you were essentially saying diving was not safe and we shouldn't be doing it, obviously I am wrong since you have not been burned at the stake yet

If I said that, I'd throw the torch myself.

 

[ScubaSteve]

obviously I am wrong

:shocked2: :doh: :mooner: :cool2:

 

[CDNScubaMoose]

Let us not forget that we were dealing with a newly certified diver and I don't think we can have the same expectations for their abilities as we do with an experienced diver. I think the newly certified diver should understand his/her responsibility for self preservation but we should ALL remember the learning curve and the need for some help from fellow divers and especially a DM. I don't think it is unreasonable for a new diver to let a DM know they are new and expect a watchful eye. If the DM doesn't want to take this responsibility he should say so. "you're on your own newbie, don't count on me for anything".

DMs are specifically trained to look for divers who are looking stressed or out of their comfort zone. In my DM training there was more emphasis on relationship building than how to lead a dive.

Yes, a DM is trained to anticipate problems. They should be observant, looking for that nervous diver, ready to react if they see a problem. However ALL DIVERS should be able to plan and execute a dive on their own. If they can't then they did not meet the objectives of the OW course, and therefore at the best they should have a Scuba Diver card (in PADI speak).

It sounds like the deceased and his fiancee had done two orientation dives the day before this unfortunate tragedy. I'm curious if this was done with the same DM that was leading this dive, perhaps this led the DM to believe that this new diver was better prepared then he was. At least one of the new divers felt uncomfortable and decided to dive shallower ... why didn't the deceased? To borrow from earlier in the thread - if everyone had been at 60' the DM would have gotten the message pretty quickly.

 

[Dtaine]

drive by shootings

If I said that, I'd throw the torch myself.

My take (no doubt an unpopular one): every diver is responsible for their own actions and their own safety. They can not abdicate their responsibilities to a buddy or a DM. Ever...

There's at least a few of us with similar beliefs.

 

[pilot fish]

You may have hit the nail on the head here. It does seem like there is no consistent answer. The actual product varies, even though it has the same name. I guess this is why the confusion exists.

The key question then needs to be how to make newly certified divers aware that they need to take full responsibility for themselves. I don't think the agencies are the right conduit - it would clearly damage sales.

One more thing, maybe an aside: I've variously heard that you need to be careful when you decide to become a DM as that is a professional rating and once you're professional there are certain legal responsibilities or liabilities you could incur in the event of an accident. Is this true and does this have any bearing on this discussion? J

This seems not to apply in Cayman, or to some divers on this board.

 

[pilot fish]

I have followed this entire mind-numbing thread and vowed I would not participate. Perhaps I can be helpful here.

I have posted on this topic often, since many people seem inclined to think that the opposite of what the reports convey is true. Here are two of my posts.

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/3837369-post148.html

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/accidents-incidents/278385-2007-dan-report-gas-management-fatalities.html

In recent years, there is not a strong correlation between new divers and fatalities. There is a much stronger correlation between age (older divers) and health (heart conditions and obesity).

Another interesting factor is that for the last decade being examined (1995-2005), the total number of deaths from scuba in the area being studied (North America) is more than 40% lower than the first decade of study (1970-1980).

DAN's statistics for North America contradict the general notion that new divers are more likely to die while diving or that divers are dying at higher rates than in the past.

It would be interesting to see how Cayman's numbers stack up? Op says the fatalitiy numbers are high there. Is that true?

 

[pilot fish]

It would appear to be INTENTIONALLY misleading, if that is so, and used not ony to save bucks but give a safer appearance.

Now let's take things in a completely different direction...

We've beat the subject of DM responsibilities almost to death in this thread. However if I was going to take an educated guess, I'd bet that there was NOT a DM on this dive. It's much more likely that this person was an OWSI (Open Water Scuba Instructor).

My reason for thinking this is that Cayman requires foriegners to have a work permit in order to seek employment. The cost of this permit is usually absorbed by the employer. Since a DM has limited usefulness in teaching, in my experience, most of the dive op employees are instructors and just perform "DM duties" to give the employer the most bang for the buck.

Many of the posters in this thread have shifted their viewpoint on who was responsibile in light of the continuing addition of new information. I'd be curious to see if their view point changes if it turns out that the DM was in actuality an OWSI.