Scuba Diving a Hazardous activity?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I look at this COMPLETELY different than the rest of these posts. I think if the insurance company looks at actual data - they clearly see the amount they pay out in claims for Scuba deaths is small, VERY small compared to a lot of other things. Ill would think the death rate for other common activities (maybe even driving a car, or riding in a car...not worth looking up right now) is higher (even when adjusted for volume of drivers and volume of people that dive).

BUT - I think it offers a unique opportunity to increase rates for the sole purpose of profit. Since they all do it - its a significant increase in premium for anyone that is a diver. Ill bet the profit on those premium increases compared to the dollars paid out from Scuba deaths is a large differential and they are profiting a lot.


But then again......I also dont necessarily have a problem with it as insurance companies are not there for charity. If they pay the claim they are supposed to - Im ok with Market set prices and competitiion driving a competitive price. I shopped around until I found acceptable prices.
 
I can understand sky diving, motorcycle riding (which I also do) and other hazardous activities, but scuba diving?

Jim

It's a relative thing. Compared to going to the movies you are certainly putting yourself at greater risks. People screw up, gear fails, conditions change, no gas no life. All told insurance companies have every reason to consider this exposure.

The good new, at least by my experience is that all told when you tell them you are a recreational diver, not commercial or professional thye consider it a non-issue. I don't think they even asked me about overheads like caves wrecks or ice.

Pete
 
remember that scuba diving is not "safe". it is an active sport activity with inherent risk...like every other sport. Golf has risks. Being a "safe" diver means that you understand and mitigate those risks with skills, techniques and equipment.
more people get hurt...even killed riding a bicycle. Not enough people, underwriters included, understand recreational diving.
 
Maybe off-topic but I'm really curious why anyone that is retiring would want to spend money on life insurance.
I'm coming up to retirement and the days when my demise would have been a financial burden to my family are now past. House is paid off, kids are grown up and launched on their own careers and don't depend on me in any way. My pension pays to the surviving member of the couple so my wife is covered.
Obviously there may be circumstances that you don't wish to discuss on this forum but if it's nothing too personal I'd like to understand the logic behind your thinking.

On a related topic I'm starting to note the age clause in the most common TRAVEL insurance policies - many insurers have a 68 or 69Y age limit on this type of policy and as we're getting closer to this limit I'm starting to investigate. As opposed to life insurance I expect to need travel insurance for some years still.
 
Heck, I think living and breathing would be considered hazardous with some insurance companies. Besides, how many of them pay any way? They'll invoke the "act of God" clause. We're facing that cr@p here on Catalina after the big storm of December 30th.

The only insurance companies I've not had a problem with were Allstate on a health policy (taken out in the early 60s by my father and no longer offered when I filed my claim but they paid up even though my primary health insurer had already covered it) and DAN's equipment insurance partner.

Hmmm... I just realized one of my life insurance policies was taken out when I was born in 1947 before SCUBA gear was even generally recognized here in the States!
 
Maybe off-topic but I'm really curious why anyone that is retiring would want to spend money on life insurance.
I'm coming up to retirement and the days when my demise would have been a financial burden to my family are now past. House is paid off, kids are grown up and launched on their own careers and don't depend on me in any way. My pension pays to the surviving member of the couple so my wife is covered.

Our house is not paid off, nor is her car. Plus dying is not cheap either, it's very easy to have $100K of hospital bills in a short time (I had a $1,000 copay CT scan on my torn achilles a couple of months ago). Health insurance ain't what it used to be either.

She doesn't dive so that actually was not an issue with her, but I'd never heard of that particular question. As for Pension, no pension for either of us. What we have saved over the years is what we're living off of, plus Social Security for as long as that lasts (she's not eligible for that yet). Of course the savings will go to whoever is left. It's just to have a little extra cushion for the surviving spouse.

In my case with all of the extremely hazardous activities I partake in (Motorcycles and Scuba) it can't hurt.

Jim
 
YOU may not think scuba is risky because you are a good diver, just as you are a good motorcycle rider, ...

One difference I see is that no matter how good a cycle rider you are (and I was one) it doesn't preclude some dumbass from mowing you down.
 
One difference I see is that no matter how good a cycle rider you are (and I was one) it doesn't preclude some dumbass from mowing you down.

Yep.... that's why I try to minimize the damage if they do... Interestingly enough in the questions to my wife, they didn't ask about motorcycle riding but they did include scuba diving, sky diving and flying private planes.

The comment about it being a foreign environment with the use of life support equipment to do it, kinda says it all. I just don't think of it being hazardous while I'm doing it. Having ridden a Motorcycle for 40+ years and my situational awareness always very high in everything I do, it never crosses my mind that scuba diving is a dangerous activity. I just know that I've got to be aware of everything that' going on around me and with my equipment. I've called dives several times for no other reason than I didn't feel right about it.

Anyway, thanks everyone for your comments I do see another perspectives to the question that was asked to my wife.

Jim
 
I have been at this diving thing a long time, and over the years, I've had conversations about the relative safety of diving with everyone from my Mother to new students. I must confess that I still don't really know if it is or not. One thing that is clear to me though, is that diving has great POTENTIAL to be very dangerous. Even a relatively minor incident can lead to a very serious injury or death very quickly, if it isn't managed properly. When I managed a dive operation in Tobermory years ago, there were several fatalities every year up there. In almost every case, a minor event, such as a tank slipping out of a harness, or a freeze-up led to the death of the diver, and frequently, the death of the diver's buddy as well. I was a new Instructor then, and these incidents had a pretty big impact on how I looked at this sport.

In the PADI-fication of the diving world ("diving is glamorous and safe and fun and training is easy and everybody can do it bla, bla, bla") it is easy to forget that we are in a totally foreign environment, and highly reliant on some hunks of brass and rubber.

But no mistake about it, that pretty lake, or amazing ocean can kill you dead, very quickly, and with absolutely no malice. Diving is extremely dangerous IF we don't take all of the necessary steps to eliminate these risks, or at least minimize them.

Having said this, two things have always stood out to me. First of all, unlike other activities such as motorcycle riding, we as divers, have a huge amount of control over what happens to us. Riding a bike, all it takes is one distracted car driver to run a red, and you're "done". I used to ride bikes too, and within a span of 7 months, one friend was killed by a drunk driver, and another lost her leg when a farm trailer lost a wheel at night, which came across the highway and took out the bike she was a passenger on. Both accidents would have been fairly minor if my friends had been in cars, but their exposure on the bike was very high.

With regard to the OP's question, I suspect that a huge factor in his Insurer's risk analysis is his age (which, since he has retired, I assume to be at least mid to late 50s if not older). As we have seen on this forum, there have been many, many accidents lately which fall into the category of "died while diving", not "from" diving. There have been two of these fatalities in the past three years in Tobermory where the victims were "60-ish" men who suffered heart attacks and drowned.

So I thing the answer to the question "Is diving dangerous?" is "It depends". It depends on hundreds of factors that include everything from the water temperature to the health of the diver to the depth of the dive and the state of the equipment the diver is using... and a ton of other factors.

But I think one thing is clear... diving has the potential to be very dangerous and it requires serious consideration to minimize the many risks.

I have managed to survive about 5100 dives to date. I can only think of three dives where I feel (in hindsight) that I managed a bad situation rather well (or possibly got lucky!), and survived to laugh about it.

Planning for survival is a good strategy I believe. I used to teach my Advanced students to occasionally visualize a nasty situation while they were diving, and plan how they would deal with it, in the unlikely event that their "fantasy emergency" happened to turn real. I still do that myself, imagining how I would respond if my reg stopped working, or I blew my drysuit zipper or some other unlikely event. So far, so good!
 
I look at this COMPLETELY different than the rest of these posts. I think if the insurance company looks at actual data - they clearly see the amount they pay out in claims for Scuba deaths is small, VERY small compared to a lot of other things. Ill would think the death rate for other common activities (maybe even driving a car, or riding in a car...not worth looking up right now) is higher (even when adjusted for volume of drivers and volume of people that dive).

BUT - I think it offers a unique opportunity to increase rates for the sole purpose of profit. Since they all do it - its a significant increase in premium for anyone that is a diver. Ill bet the profit on those premium increases compared to the dollars paid out from Scuba deaths is a large differential and they are profiting a lot.


But then again......I also dont necessarily have a problem with it as insurance companies are not there for charity. If they pay the claim they are supposed to - Im ok with Market set prices and competitiion driving a competitive price. I shopped around until I found acceptable prices.

Maybe there are two schools of insurance company thought: (1) "Since the amount we pay out in total scuba-related claims is small relative to what we gross in premiums, we will spread the cost over all our clients," or (2) "Since the amount we pay out in any given scuba-related claim is large, and we have so relatively few clients who are scuba divers, we will use riders with our diver clients so that we can keep rates lower for the majority of our clients." I guess (2) would reflect a belief that scuba, skydiving, and flying a private plane are far less common activities than automobile driving or even motorcycle riding, but when there is a scuba/skydiving/plane accident the potential claim is likely to be larger.

It's just a thought. I'm neither especially knowledgeable about insurance nor an actuary.
 

Back
Top Bottom