Does having 'Rescue Diver' certification make you potentially more liable...

[farsidefan1]

What Bob said

I was told as an instructor that if I don't assist in an emergency I can be held liable. That came from a couple of attorneys, although they didn't practice in related fields to diving emergency management.

Got to consider the source :0

Of course an atty thinks you would be liable. That was covered in law school 101, right before the "look how much money you can make with a lawsuit" class.

 

[emoreira]

Besides, We were taught in my SSI OWD course that the snorkel should be marked with the apropriate amount of colour rings depending on the certification.
For this a Rescue Diver should have 3 red rings in the snorkel. Of course 1st the rescue diver should mark the snorkel and 2nd, the rescue diver should use the snorkel.

 

[Cave Diver]

What Bob said

I was told as an instructor that if I don't assist in an emergency I can be held liable. That came from a couple of attorneys, although they didn't practice in related fields to diving emergency management.

I think that the question would be if there is a problem and the rescue diver does not act, for which ever reason, is it liable, not for what he did, but for what he did not do ?

I'm not a lawyer... But I've always been told that the duty to care only relates to professionals. i.e. As a layperson, knowing CPR does not obligate me to act if someone chokes in a restaurant. For a doctor or nurse, there would be some obligation to act. The same applies to rescue diver certs. You're not a professional, and have no duty to act and if you do act within the scope of your training your efforts are protected by Good Samaritan laws in most states.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

For a doctor or nurse, there would be some obligation to act.

This is incorrect, at least in the U.S. (not sure what the laws are in other countries). In the U.S., a doctor or nurse does not have a duty, explicit or implicit, to provide care to a stranger in distress whom he/she encounters on the street, on/in the water, or in the air. The doctor/nurse is, however, subjected to the same responsibility that any non-health professional encountering an emergency is. If a person witnesses an emergency, he/she needs to report it to EMS (call 911).

 

[ringmod65]

IAAL

This is a topic that I've though long and hard about ever since an instructor told me, "As soon as you even look in the general direction of an incident, you're involved." This bothered me everyday for several months before I decided that he was absolutely correct.

The only time I would attempt any type of rescue is if it were my regular buddy, a close friend or a family member. Even if you are only deposed by the plaintiff's counsel, you should obtain representation.

Just another hazard of diving.

Best.

p.s.

BTW, there are plenty of penalties for bring frivolous litigation - especially in Federal practice:

Under the well-known Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure a litigant (or their attorney) found to make a frivolous claim may be subject to monetary penalties.

The US Code has long provided for the ability of a federal court to require a losing party to pay for a defendent's damages.

Also, the Internal Revenue and Bankruptcy codes explicitly spell out penalties for frivolous litigation.

Do idiots get away with filing multimillion dollar actions against dry cleaners for losing a pair of pants? Sure. If there is no law specifically proscribing such actions. But to say that there are no penalties under U.S. law penalizing frivolous suits is inaccurate.

Finally, being accused of bringing frivolous actions results in a huge black mark against an attorney in the eyes of bar. As such, an attorney interested in a career and not a quick buck will refuse to sign their name to an obviously frivolous action.

 

[Cave Diver]

This is incorrect, at least in the U.S. (not sure what the laws are in other countries). In the U.S., a doctor or nurse does not have a duty, explicit or implicit, to provide care to a stranger in distress whom he/she encounters on the street, on/in the water, or in the air. The doctor/nurse is, however, subjected to the same responsibility that any non-health professional encountering an emergency is. If a person witnesses an emergency, he/she needs to report it to EMS (call 911).

Thanks for that clarification.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I'm not a lawyer... But I've always been told that the duty to care only relates to professionals.

... only while "on duty" ... being a scuba instructor does not obligate me to act unless I'm participating in the dive as a scuba instructor. If I'm "on vacation", I'm just another diver. Now ... if I choose to act, I will be held to a higher standard of duty because of my training ... but there is no more obligation for me to get involved than there is anyone else.

As a layperson, knowing CPR does not obligate me to act if someone chokes in a restaurant.

Which would be fortunate, since CPR won't help a choking person. The Heimlich maneuver, on the other hand, might come in handy ...

For a doctor or nurse, there would be some obligation to act.

In some states, their only obligation would be to call for emergency responders. In other states, there is no obligation at all.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I find this attitude disturbing to say the least. I just hope your loved one, friend, or buddy is never on a boat without you. They may end up being on one with everyone like you and if they have a problem they're screwed if that's the case. In fact if I had a student with that attitude I'd refuse to certify them if it came out during training.

IAAL

This is a topic that I've though long and hard about ever since an instructor told me, "As soon as you even look in the general direction of an incident, you're involved." This bothered me everyday for several months before I decided that he was absolutely correct.

The only time I would attempt any type of rescue is if it were my regular buddy, a close friend or a family member. Even if you are only deposed by the plaintiff's counsel, you should obtain representation.

Just another hazard of diving.

Best.

p.s.

BTW, there are plenty of penalties for bring frivolous litigation - especially in Federal practice:

Under the well-known Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure a litigant (or their attorney) found to make a frivolous claim may be subject to monetary penalties.

The US Code has long provided for the ability of a federal court to require a losing party to pay for a defendent's damages.

Also, the Internal Revenue and Bankruptcy codes explicitly spell out penalties for frivolous litigation.

Do idiots get away with filing multimillion dollar actions against dry cleaners for losing a pair of pants? Sure. If there is no law specifically proscribing such actions. But to say that there are no penalties under U.S. law penalizing frivolous suits is inaccurate.

Finally, being accused of bringing frivolous actions results in a huge black mark against an attorney in the eyes of bar. As such, an attorney interested in a career and not a quick buck will refuse to sign their name to an obviously frivolous action.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Is this not analogous to a person trained in CPR coming across a victim? Millions of people get basic CPR and first aid training from various agencies who issue "certification" cards. If taking a basic CPR course were to expose a person to potential liability above that of any ordinary untrained person, nobody would take the course. I have to believe that the Good Samaritan laws are intended to prevent exactly this. I don't see any difference between having a Rescue card and having, say, a CPR card (not to mention that a CPR/EFR card is required to complete the Rescue course).

Now, if we're talking a level of achievement that a lawyer could point to as being considered a "professional" level by its agency, the result might be different. PADI does tout Divemaster as being its first "professional" level. Of course, if one merely has a DM card in his pocket and has not undertaken to guide anybody, it seems like it would still be a tough argument to win. But there are clever lawyers out there, and anything is possible.

By the way, I don't know how successful the tactic of "always showing the lowest card needed to get on the boat" would be. Whether you show your high card (are we talking diving or poker?!) or not, you still possess the card or at least possess the training associated with the card. If you were to rescue someone unsuccessfully, and a lawyer decided to try to prove you were negligent, I'm certain the truth about your possession of a Rescue, DM, etc., card would come out during your deposition.

 

[Cave Diver]

Which would be fortunate, since CPR won't help a choking person. The Heimlich maneuver, on the other hand, might come in handy ...


In some states, their only obligation would be to call for emergency responders. In other states, there is no obligation at all.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Depends on whether they go unconscious or not

After doing a bit of research it seems like one or two states does include a responsibility to act within your scope of training under the Good Samaritan Law but the majority do not.

Article 223-7 of the Latham County Penal Code was a classic example of that.