Another Ethical Question

[Tinystiletto 0]

How many people can you blame for an accident at the drop zone?

There's always the obvious ones, DZO, DZM, S&TA, the person that sold you the canopy, the person that sold you the shoes you were wearing, friends, Family, Some one who may have thought that you might be jumping a canopy that could be too small for you. etc etc etc.
How about being a little creative? Shouldn't the guy who you bought your car from have known that you might drive to the DZ and possibly get hurt? How about the guy that told you to wear 'sturdy shoes'? If you had been barefoot your wingloading would have been less, and that could have saved you right? Or the weatherman who said it would be a nice day, he should of known that would cause you to head for the DZ right?

If YOU are not willing to take responsibillity for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

If you are worried about the 'image' of skydiving and dont want the accidents to have a negative impact on the sport, then find one of these jumpers who blame everyone but the jumper for an accident and GROUND THEM. Find the jumper that doesn't know you cant do a 180 at 50 feet and ground them too.

Or, take care and make sure YOU know what YOU are doing. Be aware of the risks and use YOUR head. Make up your own mind what risks are acceptable and which ones aren't. Make that decision and live with it.

I feel a little better now,..lol.....

Jazz

[Opie 0]

Quote

If YOU are not willing to take responsibillity for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

Well said.
This would look good posted above the manifest window.

[kallend 1,643]

Quote

How many people can you blame for an accident at the drop zone?

There's always the obvious ones, DZO, DZM, S&TA, the person that sold you the canopy, the person that sold you the shoes you were wearing, friends, Family, Some one who may have thought that you might be jumping a canopy that could be too small for you. etc etc etc.
How about being a little creative? Shouldn't the guy who you bought your car from have known that you might drive to the DZ and possibly get hurt? How about the guy that told you to wear 'sturdy shoes'? If you had been barefoot your wingloading would have been less, and that could have saved you right? Or the weatherman who said it would be a nice day, he should of known that would cause you to head for the DZ right?

If YOU are not willing to take responsibillity for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

If you are worried about the 'image' of skydiving and dont want the accidents to have a negative impact on the sport, then find one of these jumpers who blame everyone but the jumper for an accident and GROUND THEM. Find the jumper that doesn't know you cant do a 180 at 50 feet and ground them too.

Or, take care and make sure YOU know what YOU are doing. Be aware of the risks and use YOUR head. Make up your own mind what risks are acceptable and which ones aren't. Make that decision and live with it.

I feel a little better now,..lol.....

Jazz

How would that apply to a student on a first jump, or a tandem passenger; people who simply don't have the knowledge and experience to understand the risks in the first place? Do you believe that a tandem master or AFF instructor has an obligation to such people?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[riggerrob 558]

kallend,
This thread is primarily aimed at licensed jumpers.

quote:"How would that apply to a student on a first jump, or a tandem passenger; people who simply don't have the knowledge and experience to understand the risks in the first place? Do you believe that a tandem master or AFF instructor has an obligation to such people? " end quote.

Yes, first jump students place their lives in the hands of instructors. First jump instructors have an ethical obligation to minimize injuries to students. But good instructors quickly shift that responsibility to students over the next half dozen jumps.

Here is a new dilemma for you: If a tandem student student has his legs correctly positioned for landing, then relaxes them at 50 feet, and the instructor breaks the student's ankle when he sits on it (while trying to do standard butt slide landing), who is responsible for the fracture?

[Tinystiletto 0]

How would that apply to a student on a first jump, or a tandem passenger; people who simply don't have the knowledge and experience to understand the risks in the first place? Do you believe that a tandem master or AFF instructor has an obligation to such people?


Here is how it applies to first time jumpers and tandem passengers,

If YOU are not willing to take responsibility for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

Skydiving is not 'safe', every jump involves risk. The only way to 'eliminate' that risk is not to jump. So, if you are not willing to accept that risk, then dont jump. Dont whine at the TM, the AFF guy or the DZO, just dont jump!
If the concept of taking full responsibility for your own actions is strange or just doesn't seem right to you then dont jump.

I hope that clarifies my opinion,

Jazz

[jerry81 10]

Quote

Here is how it applies to first time jumpers and tandem passengers,

If YOU are not willing to take responsibility for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

So if an instructor forgets to attach the static line, would the student be completely responsible for whatever happened to him/her? (True example from around where I come from. The student later complained that her parachute took a long time to open and did not realize the aad had popped the reserve...) There was a discussion in the incidents forum not long ago that had something to do with radios on students- while I firmly believe you should be able to land a parachute yourself the first time you jump, the best argument for radios was "because they're students". It takes some time to get used to jumping out of an airplane and the psychological shock of it can cause newbies to do foolish things. Which does not mean that students are completely irresponsible for what they do, I just want to say that in such cases, the responsibility is, imo, divided.

---

[tb62871 0]

If a student doesn't know that jumping can be dangerous then the FJC instructor missed something with this student, and that may not be the instructors fault. Some people have selective hearing and there is no one but the student to blame for that. If you decide to leave through that open door you are responsible for what hapens after you do.

--TB
Welcome my friends to the show that never ends.

[Tinystiletto 0]

If the TM makes a mistake, the student can avoid it by not getting on the plane, if a packer makes a mistake, the jumper can avoid the risk by not getting on the plane.
It would be great if we could get past the 'who's to blame' game wouldn't it?.
Whatever the nature of the accident the jumper holds final responsibility, the jumper can just go bowling instead, thus avoiding the humans who make mistakes.
If a new jumper wants to make a jump he/she should be aware of the risks involved, I was aware BEFORE my first jump that I might not live through it. I had read and signed a waiver, researched the subject and had decided that I would accept the risk. If a first time jumper doesn't know the risks they should not be on a plane, period.

as always this is just my opinion, most of my opinions are not accepted well by the general public, but its not my fault, maybe my parents were mean to me, or maybe I had a bad teacher, or maybe it was society, or......you get the point I'm sure.....lol


Jazz

[wmw999 2,144]

Yes, you did accept the risks. However, part of risk management in learning to skydive is choosing what you hope is a competent instructor and a dropzone with adequate equipment. Because while you understand intellectually that you can die, obviously you don't expect to; you expect that either you or your instructor will take whatever action is necessary to avoid that. As a student, you have no idea of all of the ugly possibilities.

As a first jump student, you have no idea beyond sanity check whether information you're given is accurate. And sanity check isn't a reliable indicator in all cases.

Part of being a student for many people is accepting that others will limit your experience, so that you can master the easier skills first. You have some input in what's limited, but effectively that's what's happening. Think about a learner's permit, or a doctor going through internship.

The question in some ways is whether a one-sided abrogation by the instructor/DZ owner etc. of that implied agreement is worse than just "bad advice and all advice is equal." Yes, the student is the one suffering the consequences. But if he thought he'd done some risk management, and followed advice he thought was reliable based on his limited experience, that's a pity.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Remster 24]

This isnt about ethics, its about responsability.

Being ethical means, to me, going beyond plain old responsability.

Remster

[Tinystiletto 0]

You got me there, hmmm....

Jazz

On second thought,
It is unethical to blame others for a situation that you put yourself in. Even more so with all the financial devastation that could result.

[jerry81 10]

I don't think ethical and legal responsibility are so easily interchangeable. While a student does sign a waiver and accepts legal responsibility for his actions, his instructor will still without doubt feel an ethical responsibility to prevent the student from harming himself because of his lack of experience. If someone I look up to regarding skydiving tells me I'd be fine on an elliptical 105, I wouldn't listen to them, but would consider such an advice ethically questionable.

Yes, in the end, every individual is responsible for their own actions and I agree this should be emphasized regarding everything, not just skydiving. But every individual's action is a result of interactions with other individuals, and if a certain action causes death or injuries to our individual, the partners in those interactions that led to this action are, according to my ethical system, partially responsible, even though the crucial part of responsibility (that is, the part over which lawsuits are fought) belongs to the dead or injured individual.

---

[sfc 0]

Quote

Quote

It is unethical to blame others for a situation that you put yourself in. Even more so with all the financial devastation that could result.

If I ever have another car accident that is my fault I'll tell the other driver to get lost, after all it was his choice to drive on the road, he could have just stayed home and watched TV, it's not my fault that he decided to drive and it's not my fault he put his car in a position where I would hit it while I was driving badly.

[crazy 0]

Quote

If YOU are not willing to take responsibillity for yourself, then dont jump. If you feel that some one else should be held accountable for YOUR actions then DONT JUMP!

I had a skydiving accident, put the blame on another jumper and got my medical bills and damaged equipment reimbursed by his insurance.
Do you mean that i should have paid the bills by myself? Do you mean that if i'm not willing to pay myself, then i'd rather not jump?

--
Come
Skydive Asia

[billvon 2,425]

>Do you mean that if i'm not willing to pay myself, then i'd rather not jump?

If you're unwilling or unable to pay for the care you'll need after an accident, I would think twice about jumping - no matter where the blame lies.

[SkyMissy 0]

Quote

I had a skydiving accident, put the blame on another jumper

Damn, I thought the US was the only place liability laws were out of control. How'd you end up in the air with somebody dangerous?

________________________________________________
Mike

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

If you're unwilling or unable to pay for the care you'll need after an accident, I would think twice about jumping - no matter where the blame lies.

Yet, in many instances this is not all as clear cut as it seems. It would be nice to perceive skydiving as such an esoteric pastime that "normal relations" wouldn't work. The rest of the world however (where most of us do all sorts of things to make money) doesn't see it that way. They CAN take us to court and CAN win. Also, there are situations where the decision to sue is taken out of the hands of the party (the injured jumper) that is suing the DZ or the fellow skydiver. In name you find your jumping buddy against you in court, while in fact it is his insurance company that has decided to give it a shot. To say beforehand that such a case never can have any merit is also wrong IMHO.

When we make our all too dangerous journey to the DZ by car and a reckless driver brings us in hospital, we would sue - that is, even if we wouldn't, our insurance company would sue...

When we board the plane and a reckless mechanic brings us in the same condition in the same hospital, then I guess the same goes...

If somebody knocks us out doing a hook turn landing in the outside packing area - way past the beer line and again we end up in the hospital in the same condition, I fail to see why that person is beyond suing because he is a 'fellow skydiver'

I have seen relatives of a first jump student suing a DZ and knowing some of the facts of that case I wasn't at all surprised when the waiver was thrown out by the court. I am aware of some ridiculous and frivolous cases but the principle of accountability doesn't suddenly lose al merit just because parachutes are involved...

Then again, suing Sun Path since you couldn't find any handles on a Javelin and were stopped by a cypres ?!?!? (skydiving mag Vol 22 nr 4 nov 2002)

Last time I looked at one of those rigs I distinctly remember all handles were there...

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[billvon 2,425]

>When we board the plane and a reckless mechanic brings us in the
> same condition in the same hospital, then I guess the same goes...

I don't guess that. I wouldn't sue Pat even if he made a mistake overhauling one of the Skyvan's engines. I would try to get him to help me out if I needed help (whether it's money or getting driven around etc) and knowing him (and Melanie) he would probably help out to the extent he could. But I wouldn't sue him, because I know people can screw up and I take that risk every time I fly in one of Pat's planes.

>I fail to see why that person is beyond suing because he is a 'fellow
>skydiver'

Question - if your sister was driving somewhere and made a really stupid mistake, would you sue her? Why not, if she was at fault?

Lawsuits are there to recover money when reasonable measures fail. Skydivers are often reasonable. If Tony did that to me (doubtful) I'd ask him to cover part of the medical costs, and he likely would. If Dave Peterson did that, then he wouldn't be able to afford it. Suing him would be pointless - what would I get, his trailer?

The issue is not that skydivers don't make mistakes, or that they're not responsible for things. The issue is that, in a community like this, you don't need lawsuits to settle your differences. If you think you do, you've already lost.

[Tinystiletto 0]

In most of our daily activities there is an assumption of safety, the roads are statisticly 'safe', cops are on patrol to ensure compliance with laws to highten that perceived 'safety' etc etc.
A drop zone has none of that. It is not 'safe' to skydive, it never was and never will be. If you are the type of person that will sue after an accident then you shouldn't be assuming the risk of making a jump. You should accept the fact that you are unwilling to take the risk and stay on the ground. That would help the skydiving community in a huge way.
The legal aspect is not interesting to me, what I find interesting is the moron that wants to blame 412 people for an accident. IF YOU DONT GET ON THE PLANE YOU WONT HAVE A SKYDIVING ACCIDENT.
You have that control, use it well.

Jazz

[SkyMissy 0]

AMEN Brotha! What is sad is that due to all of the frivolous lawsuits out there, even legitimate ones leave a bad taste in my mouth. There has been at least 1 time recently, in which I probably, justifiably could have won a legitimate suit, probably pretty big $$. I talked to my wife, and even though we definitely need money, neither one of us could live with what the damn lawyers would make, and the fact that we would then be part of the litigous society that I just can't somach. So, for better or worse, we let it slide, and will continue slaving for eternity.....with peace of mind.

________________________________________________
Mike

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

I wouldn't sue Pat even if he made a mistake overhauling one of the Skyvan's engines.

Am I right to assume Pat isn't a reckless mechanic 'in your book'? But (for arguments sake) you are NOT in Pat's carefully overhauled Skyvan where he made just one honest mistake. You are in someone elses Skyvan and after the fact the NTSB proves that this person screwed up bigtime. (falsified log entries, non airworthy material - I don't have to paint the whole picture, now do I?)
They never got caught before - in fact the crash that brings you in a wheel chair the rest of your natural life is the first one where all this comes to surface.
If you don't sue (don't allow your insurance company to sue) you are fucked bigtime. You lose your job. You lose your income. The hospital bill is astronomical...
Someone walks up to you saying - " You can have all the benefits your insurance entitles you to. However - read the small prints - we can sue anyone we want on behalf of you. If you have a problem with that don't sign on the dotted line. By the way - that is OUR wheel chair and we want it back if you don't sign..."

Quote

Question - if your sister was driving somewhere and made a really stupid mistake, would you sue her? Why not, if she was at fault?

If I were the victim and there was insurance cover I might. It might be out of my hands (i.e. not up to me to decide) from the start. Nothing personal - just the facts of life...

Quote

The issue is that, in a community like this, you don't need lawsuits to settle your differences. If you think you do, you've already lost.

From my experience (I'm a DZO remember?) I have been on 'the receiving end' up 'till now, when it comes to (the threat of) lawsuits. However, I never blamed the guy (one person - knock on wood) that sent a lawyer after me and my business. I have always perceived that he probably didn't have much to say about what was happening next. Yes it was frivolous. Yes it took time and effort. Yes, it never went to court. I can imagine things that DO go to court, however.

So I spend a few euro's more on safety and a few euro's less on traveling the world skydiving my ass of...

That can't be all bad, now can it...?

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

If you are the type of person that will sue after an accident then you shouldn't be assuming the risk of making a jump.

Correction: I'm not the type of person that sues; in all likelihood, I'm the 'type of person' that gets sued. On one hand I get my customers to sign pieces of paper that say they will not sue me even if it is completely clear that I am to blame. On the other hand I try my utmost to keep them from killing themselves and / or end up in hospitals. I'm trying to get a perspective on things that is as realistic as possible. The legal aspect can be of consequence to me and is therefore interesting to me. Since 'IF YOU DON'T DRIVE IN THE CAR YOU WON'T HAVE A CAR ACCIDENT' has proven to be insignificant in a court of law, the 'DON'T GET IN THE PLANE' approach doesn't look very promising either...

(Then again - I don't pay for my jumps most of the times...hehehe...)

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[wmw999 2,144]

I'm pretty much with you on this. The cases where I'd sue are few and far between, but where you have someone who is likely to pose a continuing threat, then it can be a good way to limit the threat. Either the publicity or the loss of money. The other is the insurance thing, where you have to.

I have been a party to a lawsuit. My first house was built, knowingly, adjacent to a toxic waste dump. Not an authorized dump, but a site that was used off-the-books. The developer knew from the start; the builders knew before we bought our house. They kept selling.

That's negligence, when they earn profits specifically by bypassing important basics or hiding/falsifying information.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Push 0]

Why should skydiving be immune to this? If a good instructor forgot to hook up a static line, the student got a spinner on his reserve and spent a year in a hospital, that is within the accepted risk category. The instructor, the rigger, the DZO, the pilot, the jumpers on the load and the student all screwed up, but it was a one time mistake. On the other hand, if this happens every week because the pilots are unlicensed, the rigger is stoned, the DZO could care less and the instructors are unrated, why shouldn't they be sued?

-- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo
Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you.

[Opie 0]

Quote

Since 'IF YOU DON'T DRIVE IN THE CAR YOU WON'T HAVE A CAR ACCIDENT' has proven to be insignificant in a court of law, the 'DON'T GET IN THE PLANE' approach doesn't look very promising either...

Actually their are some different legal standards for participating in "inherintly dangerous sports" done for recreation so I don't think its fair to use the two situations as interchangeable. If you get in a plane that you have no idea of the quality of maintence you are taking more risk than one you know for a fact is well maintained. If you don't want to take the additional risk, Don't get on the plane.