Rescue type question

[CptTightPants21]

Yeah, but they are also children, and brain development doesn't stop at age 12. There is a reason why 16 year olds can't drink, drive, vote or join the service. There's a lot of range between toddler and tech instructor.

What would you do if you were diving with your 16 year old, you saw that they were past their turn pressure, you thumbed the dive and they waved you off (or penetrated a wreck)..? You would ascend without him?

We are getting off topic with generalities. OP needs to give some more detail on the situation and the progression of events before I can pass judgment.

16 year olds do drink, they can drive, I know 60 year olds that probably shouldn't be allowed to vote, and they fought in every war for the first 200 years of this country's history. A 16 year old is not a child.

I agree with Dirty-Dog's sentiments, although again, more specifics are needed before I can say what I would have done.

 

[doctormike]

A 16 year old is not a child.

The law in virtually every US jurisdiction disagrees with this statement. As do all diving releases.

 

[stuartv]

They may not be a child, but they are almost certainly not a mature adult, either.

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

A 16 year old is not a child.

Federal law defines a “minor” as a child under the age of 18 unless specified otherwise.

 

[OldNSalty]

If the person wasn’t a child then that paints a different picture, at least for me. If we’ve hit a turn point, the dive is thumbed and you don’t want to go then you are diving solo at that point. I am sure not going to fight you for it like we are remaking a Sea Hunt episode.

Now with the diver being a child, it’s is different and there are too many “unknowns” but if we could have safely continued the dive after that point then I would have finished it with him rather than flood his mask and saved the “discussion” for the surface.

 

[CuzzA]

Everyone keeps saying "turn pressure", but that's not what the OP said. I view turn pressure as the point at which you turn your dive from point B back to point A with the theory that you used X amount of gas to get from point A to point B and therefore you'll need approximately that amount of gas to get back to point A which includes your ascent pressure, the amount of gas to ascend, perform a safety stop and also a buffer for an unexpected emergency.

While there's still some unknowns about the situation the OP clearly states the predive plan included an ascent pressure or in other words they were instructed "at this pressure you're nearing the end of your dive and you need to head up." This leads me to believe the 16 year old was likely approaching OOA yet refused to comply with the person responsible for him/her and therefore needed some good ole fashion, "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" treatment. I do not view this as thumbing the dive.

I'm a father and if my "child" was on a dive with me, they're coming back to the surface come hell or high water. PUN INTENDED.

 

[Herb-alaska]

All agreed - when both parties ARE adults.

But, your statement about leaving an irresponsible idiot of a child behind when scuba diving... well, we'll have to agree to disagree. And particularly when you're talking about leaving someone else's child behind for the simple reason that they shook their head and said no. If the "responsible" diver had done that and the 16 y/o subsequently ran out of air, panicked, and drowned... Well, that's the kind of thing that, in the U.S., would not surprise me to see result in the "responsible" diver getting sued into bankruptcy (rightly or wrongly). That spectre alone would prevent me, personally, from just throwing up my proverbial hands and leaving a 16 y/o on the bottom that was my buddy (thoughts of some kind of actual, assigned responsibility completely aside).

In the case of a child (anyone under 18), I would never just leave them unless I HAD to. No matter how much you wish they would act like a grownup, they are still a child in the eyes of the law. I would most likely, as a final resort, effect a "rescue" of a "combative diver" (as I was trained in the Rescue Diver course) if I had to, in order to ensure we both got to the surface together and as safely as possible. Note: I said as a FINAL RESORT - meaning, after employing less drastic measures.

This diver may be a minor in the eyes of the law however the certifying agency has stated that he is a competent open water diver who is allowed to make his own decisions regarding a dive. If you choose to intervene and override his decision and he is injured then you will be sued and In my book rightfully so. If you intervene and forcefully override his decision and he is not injured then you have committed assault. Failure to turn at a set pressure is a subjective decision that he is able to make for himself because a Agency trained and certified him in the sport. If he feels he can make a safe assent and be back on the boat with a turn pressure of 500 psi who are you to physically force him to do otherwise. He was not mentally incompetent, and his decision was in violation to your standard but was it a imprudent decision? That would have to be settled in court and you better have a good lawyer.

Buddy standards do not require or encourage physically forcing a diver to follow a decision that you make.

 

[stuartv]

This diver may be a minor in the eyes of the law however the certifying agency has stated that he is a competent open water diver who is allowed to make his own decisions regarding a dive. If you choose to intervene and override his decision and he is injured then you will be sued and In my book rightfully so. If you intervene and forcefully override his decision and he is not injured then you have committed assault. Failure to turn at a set pressure is a subjective decision that he is able to make for himself because a Agency trained and certified him in the sport. If he feels he can make a safe assent and be back on the boat with a turn pressure of 500 psi who are you to physically force him to do otherwise. He was not mentally incompetent, and his decision was in violation to your standard but was it a imprudent decision? That would have to be settled in court and you better have a good lawyer.

Buddy standards do not require or encourage physically forcing a diver to follow a decision that you make.

In the scenario I described, I would have NO problem standing in front of a judge and explaining my reasoning for believing that the 16 y/o in question was mentally impaired, possibly by virtue of nitrogen narcosis, and I had reason to believe that he was endangering his life. And, thus, I rescued him. The explanation, of course, would be accompanied by a description of the dive plan and the additional measures I employed to try and get the 16 y/o to ascend with me before I felt that I had to employ the tactic of last resort. There is no question that a diver CAN become mentally incompetent during a dive. There would no way for anyone to prove whether he was or wasn't. AFAIK, nitrogen narcosis doesn't leave any quantifiable after effects. But, I feel pretty good about showing that it was reasonable for me to believe that he had become so. As an adult with Rescue Diver certification, I would feel pretty good about a judge seeing it my way.

Court is always a crapshoot, no matter who you are or what lawyer you have. But, in the scenario described, if it came to the point that I felt like I HAD to get out alone or effect a "rescue" and so I did the rescue, I would walk into court with high confidence and no regrets.

And, of course, that's all assuming that I got the 16 y/o to the surface and his parents chose to sue me rather than thank me.

 

[CuzzA]

What's the law say about preventing someone's death or suicide? I hate to assume, but if the 16 yr old buddy is actually the buddy of his/her parent and dies who is suing the parent? The spouse? Maybe the spouse was there too. I'm finding the lawsuit argument unfounded. Which then goes to is it criminal? Would a prosecutor bring charges against a parent for the death of their child during a scuba accident that was possibly created by the child?

There was a recent death of a child in California with a few unknowns other than the child was left at the bottom. I doubt anyone is getting prosecuted, maybe the dive operator is getting sued, but I'm sure someone signed the waiver. This can be found in the A and I forum. Too bad they left him down there.

 

[OldNSalty]

A lot of people are making some good points here. I am going to say that without any further info besides the fact that one diver was a minor and the other diver felt that they had reached a pre-agreed psi to come up that it was wrong to have assaulted and forced the other diver to ascend.