Inconsistent message to new divers

[mdax]

You can pretty easily hurt or kill yourself diving. Take as much care to avoid that possibility as you do other dangerous activities. For me it means taking total responsibility for planning and conducting a safe dive. Learn from as many different instructors as possible, listen to your gut regarding their behavior and knowledge.

 

[boulderjohn]

If a qualified, experienced diver wants to do a dive and really understands the risks, I'll wish them a great dive and leave it at that, but I don't buy the part about a new dive being fully informed.

I agree. New divers do not have the ability to judge their skills in comparison to difficulties they have never experienced. If an experienced DM who has sense of their skill level and who knows the difficulties of a site well tells them they are good to go on a dive for which they are not truly qualified, I don't blame them for accepting that assessment.

 

[Quero]

Perhaps, flots, but at some point we need to recognize that adults are able to make their own decisions and to accept the risks and consequences of those decisions in the event that they are unlucky and suffer an incident. In the case that John describes in Cozumel, it would be very unlikely that any of us would consider divers with just 4 or 5 dives "ready" to do the Devil's Throat dive. But they did it without incident. Does that "prove" somehow that these divers were ready or does it simply mean they weren't unlucky? Either way they made the choice as adults and were (apparently) prepared to accept the risk.

Similarly, the OP of this very thread, when he had fewer than 24 dives, was advised by many, many members here on SB not to do a particular dive in Indonesia at a dive site notorious for dangerous currents and where divers die every single year. Despite a great deal of advice to the contrary and recommendations that he gain more experience before attempting this dive, he chose to do the dive and came back smiling from it. He believed he was ready for it (he bought his instructor's line that he was a particularly awesome diver for a newbie). But wasn't he actually just not unlucky? In fact, it doesn't really matter whether it was readiness or providence since as an adult he chose to do the dive, and nobody could say that he didn't know the risks given that we went on in a thread here on SB for pages and pages trying unsuccessfully to convince him not to do the dive. It was his choice, and it was an informed one.

It's my opinion that many, many dives are carried out by divers we would consider "not ready" to do them as a result of these divers deciding on their own that they are indeed "ready" just as the OP decided he was "ready" for the Indonesia dive. The guys from the op at John Pennekamp played daddy to you, but most of us don't presume to take this role in relation to our adult divers.

 

[Teamcasa]

... but I don't buy the part about a new dive being fully informed.

I agree. New divers do not have the ability to judge their skills in comparison to difficulties they have never experienced.

This is so very true. New divers have no idea what their skill level is nor how to interpret a DM's description of a dive. So, for the most part, they are making a true "trust me" dive.

If an experienced DM who has sense of their skill level and who knows the difficulties of a site well tells them they are good to go on a dive for which they are not truly qualified, I don't blame them for accepting that assessment.

Here in SoCal, almost all of the dives are done with only a top-side DM. In fact, unless you hire one or the DM is your instructor, you will be on your own diving. There are few sites where the charter operator will not let you dive unless you can demonstrate (by your dive history or by a well known other divers recommendation) that you have the skills necessary for the site. Still other charters will take anyone with a simple AOW card, give them a good description of the site and let them splash and hope for the best.

When I dived Niihau (of the coast of Kauai), the dive shop required AOW cards, a clear warning that diving this was a serious dive and good buoyancy control was a must. It was indeed required but that did not stop one (German) diver from following a Monk seal up from 100' to the surface all the while photographing the seal. He left his buddy and got bent for his trouble.

In my view, the problem is not the DM's or the Charters. At some point the individual diver must decide if they have what it takes before they book that dive. Ask around, try to find out what you don't know before you book the dive because, once you are on the boat, peer pressure will generally win out over reason.

 

[TMHeimer]

I agree with mdax and boulderjohn. I think it has mostly to do with attitude. I new diver who finds himself in an uncomfortable situation compared to his training/experience because he was told by a DM the dive was OK for him can do two things. He can go through the dive as if he had the experience (ei. it's a 130' dive, so he goes there) or he can put on the brakes--"WHOA, you didn't say it was so deep, I'm outta here". This involves common sense on the diver's part--he was told he shouldn't venture below 60' at least at first. Some people don't use common sense to take responsibility for themselves. Of course, finding one's self in a wicked current without an anchor line and no experience is a different story. A solution may be to surface before descending too much and signal the boat. I think most will agree that everyone has limits as to what becomes uncomfortable, regardless of experience and training. One of my things is cramping (due to heredity). With potassium pills it doesn't happen often anymore, but when I do get the slightest hint in my legs I immediatley adjust my thinking. Usually make my way back to shore before any serious cramps come--though not necessarily exiting the water right away. I look at even the most benign 30' shore dive as one that could present uncomfortable situations. I's not rocket science, you just have to use common sense.

 

[lamont]

As a new diver, I am perceiving what seems to be an inconsistency among SB members regarding the level of responsibility expected of newly minted OW divers.

On one hand, most SB'ers emphasize that divers are responsible for their own safety. This becomes particularly apparent in the various threads about accidents or dangerous practices among dive ops. Inevitably, some SB veteran will chime in with a comment like "they received their certification, they should have known better than to trust the DM."

I usually see posts that I read more like cautionary tales: "This is what goes wrong when you are a new diver and you blindly trust your DM". The point isn't to heap blame on the affected diver in the incident, but to point out to the readers that they need to take their own safety seriously and be responsible for themselves. The blame is usually implied to lie with the training agencies who produce dependent divers, which usually comes out if you ask the veterans to clarify their position.

It is also largely pissing into the wind to try to get the training agencies to change or to hope for the whole diving industry to change. So, the only useful advice to give is to be responsible for yourself.

 

[boulderjohn]

Perhaps, flots, but at some point we need to recognize that adults are able to make their own decisions and to accept the risks and consequences of those decisions in the event that they are unlucky and suffer an incident. In the case that John describes in Cozumel, it would be very unlikely that any of us would consider divers with just 4 or 5 dives "ready" to do the Devil's Throat dive. But they did it without incident. Does that "prove" somehow that these divers were ready or does it simply mean they weren't unlucky? Either way they made the choice as adults and were (apparently) prepared to accept the risk.

In a recent thread related to a death in Cozumel, people posting nearly universally condemned the divers and the DMs for taking inexperienced divers to such a dangerous site. Having doived that site frequently, I would characterize it as one of the easiest of the first tank sites on the island. I assume that every week of every year hundreds of divers dive that and more dangerous sites on the island without incident. That gives pretty much everyone a general confidence that such dives can be done by just about everyone. When something goes wrong, there is all sorts of condemnation for everyone involved, but the truth is that if all OW divers were restricted to 60 foot diving (etc.), 75% of the operators in Cozumel would go out of business unless they made getting AOW certification a required part of the normal dive process.

DMs all over the world take divers beyond the strict limits of their training. I have been there when it has done without giving it a second thought myself. I doubt if anyone would be concerned with a simple 61 foot dive in benign conditions, even though it is beyond those limits. I am sure 62 feet would be OK, too.

So where is the line? At what point do depth and conditions (including especially current) become too much for the inexperienced diver? I would think that most people reading this would thing the Devil's Throat would be beyond that line, but obviously others disagree.

Professional judgment is important in making that decision.

 

[DevonDiver]

DMs all over the world take divers beyond the strict limits of their training. I have been there when it has done without giving it a second thought myself. I doubt if anyone would be concerned with a simple 61 foot dive in benign conditions, even though it is beyond those limits. I am sure 62 feet would be OK, too.

So where is the line?

I believe that question is generally answered by the agencies.

Stuff like 'depth limits' is typically fuzzy - just recommendations - the overall focus being 'training and experience'. I don't see anything difficult in recognizing that you've only be trained for 18m...and only dived previously above 18m... and comparing that against a suggested dive plan to dive to 30m....

Stuff like 'overheads' is much more defined. Precisely worded policies.

Take for example, the PADI 'Safe Diving Practices'... or equivalents from other agencies. Such documents are normally signed, verifying understanding and agreement, by divers in training/on graduation from scuba courses.

Personally, I really like that document - it makes a lot of this thread irrelevant.... except the bit that says "...respect the advice of those supervising my diving activities"... which, experience proves, can sometimes be contradictory to the rest of the document!

Professional judgment is important in making that decision.

Absolutely - but it is so often flawed in practice, whether by too little professional experience, unprofessional behavior and/or commercial pressures.

 

[dpaustex]

I like the back-and-forth of this thread.

As an Instructor, I've had "assistants" work for me that were new, themselves, to being an assitant. Most are great, but there were one or two that I'd never have assist me again, as they were not technically proficient, and flat-out gave wrong information to students.

Most dive accidents happen on the "first dive of the series". This is true for any dive level (DAN has the studies to back this up). Basically, if you go diving, and haven't done so in awhile, best to start slowly. Refreshers are recommended if more than one year.

There is an inherent trust in new divers and DM's. When I was a newbie, a newly minted DM managed to lose my youngest daughter (surfaced without her). Not a good situation.

But as an instructor, it is important for new divers to communicate the fact that they are new to the DM and/or boat operator. When I do dive planning, I use the "weak link" theory, wherein everyone should be able to do a dive. Taking new divers to Devil's Throat in Coz is assinine and endangers the group as a whole.

But when I teach divers, I teach them also to ask questions, and to have situational awareness. They are encouraged to speak up, while signing up, for trips. There has to be a give-and-take with divers and operators. No one benefits if a dive incident occurs.

But it is also a two-way street. If a DM or operator asks your skill level, be honest. If you have 100 dives in 10 years, I'd still say you don't have much experience. More relavent are your bouyancy skills, and some people nail it after 3 dives...other never. I have seen people with 300 dives that are awful divers- no skills, no buoyancy, no navigation, swim in poor position, etc. But I've had newbies work and work and work, and I'd take them diving with me anywhere. A lot of it has to do with comfort in the water, as well as the skill set. But if you are asked, be honest!!!

Great discussion.

 

[Cosmographer]

Name and Shame?

I'd rather not be too specific because the other DMs and instructors at this particular dive op were quite good, and I wouldn't want to hurt their reputation. Let's just say he was a young guy named Stephen (not much help, I know).

Andy, I think your positions are well justified for someone with your background. However, I think that you have unrealistic expectations of most new divers. Most new divers have not had the kind of training in personal responsibility that is taught by you and the other instructors here on SB. Not a single instructor that I've dove with has ever mentioned, let alone emphasized, the right and responsibility of the student to question the instructions and dive plans. I suspect you expect that level of behavior for two reasons: 1) because your students demonstrate it and 2) because you yourself were at that level as a new diver, as you mentioned previously. I believe that both reasons reflect the exception rather than the rule among new divers. I only base this on my own personal observations as a new diver, and I acknowledge that my sample size may be too small to draw universal conclusions. That said, having dove with ten different dive ops in six countries, I think that even if my experiences with instructors and DMs who don't emphasize personal responsibility reflect the minority of dive professionals, such pros are obviously prevalent enough that, in my opinion, it would be unfair to always blame new divers for accidents that occurred because of trust-me dives.

Experienced divers know that they are responsible for themselves. And they try to instill that mentality into new divers which is good, but they often do that by blaming new divers when things go wrong. While it is a good way to hammer home that message, it's not necessarily fair and not always accurate. I believe that the level of expected personal responsibility should gradually shift as one progresses from non-diver to experienced diver: from little to no responsibility as a DSD diver to total responsibility as an experienced one.