The way I recall the accident, they were off Lana'i and I heard about it on the marine radio on my own boat where I was on it off Hawaii Kai. The kids did not have cell service and we parents were told by the school that the USCG investigation was taking a very long time, and they did not release the boat for a very long time. Now, it is quite likely that the school was trying to notify the next of kin and "counsel" the kids for some portion of that time or had to do with locating the body. If you want to discuss the USCG and lost divers in Hawaii, that is another topic.
The point was they experienced the death of a beloved teacher and from my perspective, all adapted and came through the grief process. This was in response to someone commenting about children possibly seeing an accident or death. I weighed in to make several points about how resilient children are and how I am not aware of any evidence that they die or suffer accidents more than adults on dive charters.
Do you all have any figures to the contrary? In my nine years there, I only recall a whale watching accident where a child was killed.
But you stated that the USCG held them there. That seems...improbable- and is in contradiction to the facts.
You said they were held off Molakia. That is well to the north of Lanai, where the accident occurred.
The accident occurred on the south side of Lanai as well.
Investigations would be conducted on land- as it's unlikely that the procedures for an investigation would be carried out on a boat while at sea, when harbor is close by.
You heard it on a radio on a boat off Hawaii Kai? At 50 miles or so away, that's an impressive radio.
The body was recovered within minutes.
The Rapture, which the group was on, then took him to the hospital.
Schools do not inform next of kin.
The odds that there was enough counselors in the remaining 12 Adults for 98 students is quite small. Counseling would be better done on land, not the scene of the accident.
You offer one example, but the fact that counseling was seen as needed in your view contradicts that. With 98 students, likely they were not directly exposed to the accident. Furthermore, your inaccuracies in recalling this do pertain to the subject, and call into question your solitary example.
The issue is not whether the child will be killed. Harm can be done without it being deadly; and still present a great risk.
So why, in your view, does a 5-10 year old who is not participating in the activities need to be present on the boat?