For PADI Pros.........

[turnerjd]

Who read their Latest UJ?

In the DM and assisting section, there was the usual accident senario. Briefly, a newly qualified diver went into shop asked about dives, saying she was a beginner, and was booked on a boat. When she get there found it was a 26m dive. In water at depth had problem. and with buddy ended dive via a AAS ascent.

The official PADI analysis of accident was that she was doing a dive beyond her capability and had overbreathed her reg. Both her and buddy had done correct thing and aborted with suitable ascent.

Nowhere did they realise that the fault lay with the dive shop. Having said she was a beginner, why was she booked on a dive to 26m? Had the DM on the boat checked peoples qualifications? logbooks?

Having read their analysis I got my old DM manual out, and in about 3 different sections I found instructions / guidance for DM's to ensure divers were diving within their limits. including the instruction to check cards before a boat leaves.

Is It just me that thinks that their analysis is wrong? (don't forget that the PADI waivers are useless under UK law, and pretty much useless in most other European countries) Or is it official PADI policy to take their money, and lie to them that a site is suitable for beginners when it obviously isn't.

Jon T

 

[Aegir]

Hmm I would have thought that by now you would have had a reply or two Jon. I would be interested in the pros opinions on this question too

 

[Natasha]

Jon,
I can't answer your question, but I do have a question for you.
Why are PADI waivers useless under UK law and most European countries?
I just went to two seminars at our Scuba convention DEMA here, on waivers and their importance.
They never said anything about UK or other countries not honoring these waivers.
Please explain.
Thanks!
:sunny:

 

[SubMariner]

TJ, it's my opinion that BOTH parties must take responsibility on this one. When it comes to boat dives, the shop and the captain usually know in advance where they are going, and thus should be screening divers to see if the dive is within their level of experience. OTOH, dive locations are never "carved in stone"; site conditions can and do change, and so the boat moves...

That being said, it is ultimately the DIVER'S responsibility to know their limitations and dive within them. Period.

Personally, I am getting very tired of people abrogating their obligation to take care of themselves. Why is it always "someone else's fault"?

Okay... I'll get off my soapbox now...

~SubMariner~

 

[Mario S Caner]

Well Jon, I guess I would need to know more about the actual case in order to brand the entire agency as incompetant. When did she get certified, how many dives had she done? Where were those dives done? What were the specifics of the dive location in question? Did the shop or DM ask for proof of certification? If she did provide a valid c-card and chose to dive, would there be any other reason why they would deny her from diving?

Ultimately it was her decision to dive. Whether or not she was experienced enough, I don't know. But dive boats usually do not take chances with taking people to advanced dive locations without asking a question or two. As for which agency they were afiliated with... I seriously doubt it would have made a difference if it was XYZ or ABC or whatever else.

 

[turnerjd]

Originally posted by Natasha
Jon,
I can't answer your question, but I do have a question for you.
Why are PADI waivers useless under UK law and most European countries?
I just went to two seminars at our Scuba convention DEMA here, on waivers and their importance.
They never said anything about UK or other countries not honoring these waivers.
Please explain.
Thanks!
:sunny:

Natasha,

PADI waivers are written for american law. British law (and European union law) is significantly different when it comes to matters of duty of care.

The PADI waiver is best described as a liability release. Under UK law if you have a position of responsibility (ie instructor) then that position can not be legally waived.

I am sure in the states that if you signed a liability waiver for someone to murder/kill/euthanase you, that wouldn't hold up in court. Murder is murder, dead is dead. We have the same idea, but it applies to all liability releases.

At best, in the UK the releases are a mutual recognition that you are doing a dangerous sport. They are not a get out of gaol free card.

At DEMA you probably were spoken to by PADI Americas, who were talking specifically about their territory. PADI international and PADI Europe have a different attitude that PADI Americas.

Jon T

Mario - Read the current Undersea Journal - this is the example from there. I just think that there was more to it than her decision to dive. She HAD SPECIFICALLY ASKED if it was an OK dive for a beginner, and was told that it was.

 

[raffles]

OK now to address the problem at no point in this scenario is PADI at fault. PADI's policy is quite specific at all points in this scenario both as to what new divers are eligible to do and also the responcibilites of each person involved.

If the lady in question was a new diver and specifically enquired at the shop about the type of diving then the person who booked her on the trip is responsible for misinforming her. Also the person in the shop as well as the DM on the boat should be checking logbooks as well as C cards to get an idea of experience and certification level.

If the Divemaster on the boat failed to check assuming it had already done then he is also at fault. He should know better because he has certainly been taught better. He should also have gained some insight by chatting to his clients during the ride out even if he wasn't going to be in the water with them.

Now I don't know where the dive was or what sort of site it was but maybe there was a shallower profile that the customer could have done at the very same site but she chose not to. With no idea of her air consumption at greater depth and obviously without checking her guages often enough she ran out of air and had to make a controlled AAS which she did without incident because she had been taught to do it.

I agree that the analysis could have been tighter written but the function of these scenarios is to remind Divemasters (and Instructors too) that if you don't do things the way you are taught then accidents can and will happen.

IT'S A DANGEROUS SPORT and has to be taken seriously but attacking one organisation over another won't do much good

RAFFLES

 

[cottim]

I second Raffles' opinion. The shop and the DM are to blame.
Even if I'm CMAS certified, I don't believe the PADI course says its OK for a beginner to dive to 26m. I for sure know that I can't!
The shop and the DM should have been carefull about it.
As for Jon's statement about European Law I'm not sure that all EU countries have the same reasoning about waivers as the UK. Portuguese law, for example, would surely place no responsibility over PADI because of this accident. But, after all, our laws concerning diving are very strange.

 

[MrMrEZG]

according to my math (1m=3.28ft)26m =85.28ft and that seems to be a pretty average depth. what kind cert. did she have? Beginners snorkeling?

 

[cottim]

MrMrEZG

My understanding of beginner is having a CMAS P1 or a PADI OWD. I don't know about OWD but a P1 goes to 20m max. I am a beginner since I have a P1 and I'll never accept a dive to 36m unless I am with an instructor preparing P2 (which goes to 40m) or equivalent.
Cheers