If Under 12 Motion Passes What Would Your Limits Be .

[neil r]

I have posed this in the hope to get some Positive And Negative idea's of what the members would want as limits for this motion if passed .
ie depth limit 12mtrs or same as ocean diver , or must be an openwater snorkeller , or must have been a snorkelling member of a bsac club .
Do you want an enthusiastic parent to bring his child into the club and ask that they learn to dive ( cos at the moment you can at 14 )
Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .

Neil R
Chaumont .

[janos]

Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .

I have no view on limits, as I don't feel qualified to comment. I would have thought that diving limits would be a matter for the NDO?

Laters,
Janos

[Tony F]

:=Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .

I have no view on limits, as I don't feel qualified to comment. I would have thought that diving limits would be a matter for the NDO?

Laters,
Janos

I agree with Janos that this is a matter for the NDO.

That said, given no damaging data has come from the PADI Junior OW grade since it was lowered to 10 years old in fact, I'd be inclined to look closely at the depth limitations they've followed.

This is about making a start with younger divers not pushing envelopes, we do have generally harsher conditions here than many parts of the world. PADI junior OW divers are restricted to 12 metres until 12 and there are restrictions on who they may dive with (must include a parent or PADI Pro).

IMHO this would be a reasonable depth restriction for BSAC 12-14 y/o juniors. I'd say they must dive with a parent or NQI, must have a mentor/sponsor (normally parent) and a depth restriction of 12 metres.

[Mike Halligan]

Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.

Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.

Marshalling 'em - as above.

It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.

Mike

[Bob Healey]

:=:=Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .
:=
:=I have no view on limits, as I don't feel qualified to comment. I would have thought that diving limits would be a matter for the NDO?
:=
:=Laters,
:= Janos

I agree with Janos that this is a matter for the NDO.

That said, given no damaging data has come from the PADI Junior OW grade since it was lowered to 10 years old in fact, I'd be inclined to look closely at the depth limitations they've followed.

This is about making a start with younger divers not pushing envelopes, we do have generally harsher conditions here than many parts of the world. PADI junior OW divers are restricted to 12 metres until 12 and there are restrictions on who they may dive with (must include a parent or PADI Pro).

IMHO this would be a reasonable depth restriction for BSAC 12-14 y/o juniors. I'd say they must dive with a parent or NQI, must have a mentor/sponsor (normally parent) and a depth restriction of 12 metres.


I'd go along with you about the 12 to 14 year olds about being accompanied by an Instructor or parent but I would make the depth 18 metres in line with PADI Open Water Diver. They don't seem to have had any problem with it, that we know about!

[will swift]

:=:=:=Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .
:=:=
:=:=I have no view on limits, as I don't feel qualified to comment. I would have thought that diving limits would be a matter for the NDO?
:=:=
:=:=Laters,
:=:= Janos
:=
:=I agree with Janos that this is a matter for the NDO.
:=
:=That said, given no damaging data has come from the PADI Junior OW grade since it was lowered to 10 years old in fact, I'd be inclined to look closely at the depth limitations they've followed.
:=
:=This is about making a start with younger divers not pushing envelopes, we do have generally harsher conditions here than many parts of the world. PADI junior OW divers are restricted to 12 metres until 12 and there are restrictions on who they may dive with (must include a parent or PADI Pro).
:=
:=IMHO this would be a reasonable depth restriction for BSAC 12-14 y/o juniors. I'd say they must dive with a parent or NQI, must have a mentor/sponsor (normally parent) and a depth restriction of 12 metres.
:=

I'd go along with you about the 12 to 14 year olds about being accompanied by an Instructor or parent but I would make the depth 18 metres in line with PADI Open Water Diver. They don't seem to have had any problem with it, that we know about!

I always thought Jr. OW was 10-11yo = 12m 12-14yo = 18m but the 12-14yo could go on and do adventure dives to 21m max, so they allow the 12yo to go to 21m with experience.

[allan j bretherton]

Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.

Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.

Marshalling 'em - as above.

It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.

Mike

Hi Mike,

It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC

From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.

Cheers..........Allan

[Tony F]

:=:=:=Idea's and view's that might be taken into account if it comes before council .
:=:=
:=:=I have no view on limits, as I don't feel qualified to comment. I would have thought that diving limits would be a matter for the NDO?
:=:=
:=:=Laters,
:=:= Janos
:=
:=I agree with Janos that this is a matter for the NDO.
:=
:=That said, given no damaging data has come from the PADI Junior OW grade since it was lowered to 10 years old in fact, I'd be inclined to look closely at the depth limitations they've followed.
:=
:=This is about making a start with younger divers not pushing envelopes, we do have generally harsher conditions here than many parts of the world. PADI junior OW divers are restricted to 12 metres until 12 and there are restrictions on who they may dive with (must include a parent or PADI Pro).
:=
:=IMHO this would be a reasonable depth restriction for BSAC 12-14 y/o juniors. I'd say they must dive with a parent or NQI, must have a mentor/sponsor (normally parent) and a depth restriction of 12 metres.
:=

I'd go along with you about the 12 to 14 year olds about being accompanied by an Instructor or parent but I would make the depth 18 metres in line with PADI Open Water Diver. They don't seem to have had any problem with it, that we know about!

Okay, my logic is that UK diving may be harsher than many places PADI divers learn.

That coupled with the need for a softly softly safety concieous approach to pasify the anti lobby.

[Stuart Hayes]

:=Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.
:=
:=Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.
:=
:=Marshalling 'em - as above.
:=
:=It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.
:=
:=Mike

Hi Mike,

It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC

From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.

Cheers..........Allan

All this over lowering the age limit to 12. I have read what people have to say and some points I agree with. Why can't people understand that if/when it is passed it will be down to each individual club to decide if they want to teach scuba to junior members. I wish some of the dinosaurs out there would join the 21st century. I totally agree that members under 14 should be accompanied by a parent and instructor. I will be voting YES to the proposal as I have dived with many junior divers and consider them to be perfectly safe. If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach as teaching juniors needs alittle more thought. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.

[Adrian Kelland]

:=:=Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.
:=:=
:=:=Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.
:=:=
:=:=Marshalling 'em - as above.
:=:=
:=:=It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.
:=:=
:=:=Mike
:=
:=Hi Mike,
:=
:=It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC
:=
:=From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.
:=
:=Cheers..........Allan

All this over lowering the age limit to 12. I have read what people have to say and some points I agree with. Why can't people understand that if/when it is passed it will be down to each individual club to decide if they want to teach scuba to junior members. I wish some of the dinosaurs out there would join the 21st century. I totally agree that members under 14 should be accompanied by a parent and instructor. I will be voting YES to the proposal as I have dived with many junior divers and consider them to be perfectly safe. Then again I have had a hand in their training. If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.

If....

Theres the nub Stuart. How do you know? Who checked it is safe and correct? The non-diving parent, the peole doing the training, or, for example, a trained BSAC inspection team?

It may not be the training that is the problem, but the unchecked environment in which it is done. This is unchecked for 14y/o, and looks likely to remain so for 12y/o.

Adrian

[David Walker]

From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.

Yeah - little gits :O) The parents can take them to McDonalds and to play on the swings while we spend the night in the pub!
Especially with younger kids i'd want parents around, just so that when they're just messing around (as children do) I can get the parent to take them home!
I can only think of one child who's been trained through our club, and just annoyed the hell out of the instructor who was teaching him - unfortunately he was doing it with his Dad who was a friend, so kept going and got the kid trained so they could dive in Oz on holiday.
Maybe i'm just biased, since children tend to annoy me anyway :o)

David

[nick kay]

<< Personal opinion, nothing to do with the club I'm a member of >>

1. The junior MUST have a parent ("guardian") as a diving member of the club

2. The guardian MUST be present for all in-water activities and all training

[Mike Halligan]

If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.


Stuart,

Well, thank you. Gratuitous destructive criticism from a point of complete ignorance is so very welcome, and especially relished by volunteers.

I also have dived with junior divers and consider them safe. I have trained junior divers and find them exceptional students, yet I shall have nothing further to do with them and I shall now tell you why.

These are children. They are not small adults but potential adults. Regrettably, each is accompanied by one or even two appendages, a parent or two. These display classic behaviours of manipulating either student or teacher (sometimes both) in order to provide the outcome they desire, at a pace that they set and frequently in the manner they think best.

I say "No." to children because of the behaviours of parents.

That conclusion is personal and has the square-root of nothing to do with teaching technique or scuba. Your presumption does not aid your cause. It does serve to antagonise instructors who, by their nature, wish to facilitate learning and enjoyment of our sport. [I witheld my reason and experience earlier in order not to damage an argument I personally support, but before which when made so rudely, inaccurately and ineptly I shall not bow.]

Mike

[Mike Halligan]

Hi, Allan,

It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC

Likewise, more or less.

From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.

Likewise, more so !!

Mike ;-)

[Andy Wade]

If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.


Stuart,

Well, thank you. Gratuitous destructive criticism from a point of complete ignorance is so very welcome, and especially relished by volunteers.

I also have dived with junior divers and consider them safe. I have trained junior divers and find them exceptional students, yet I shall have nothing further to do with them and I shall now tell you why.

These are children. They are not small adults but potential adults. Regrettably, each is accompanied by one or even two appendages, a parent or two. These display classic behaviours of manipulating either student or teacher (sometimes both) in order to provide the outcome they desire, at a pace that they set and frequently in the manner they think best.

I say "No." to children because of the behaviours of parents.

That conclusion is personal and has the square-root of nothing to do with teaching technique or scuba. Your presumption does not aid your cause. It does serve to antagonise instructors who, by their nature, wish to facilitate learning and enjoyment of our sport. [I witheld my reason and experience earlier in order not to damage an argument I personally support, but before which when made so rudely, inaccurately and ineptly I shall not bow.]

Well said Mike.
I love it when you talk dirty.
;-)

[dano]

<< Personal opinion, nothing to do with the club I'm a member of >>

1. The junior MUST have a parent ("guardian") as a diving member of the club

2. The guardian MUST be present for all in-water activities and all training

I agree with Nick the parent needs to be a Dive Leader or above.

Will the Old grumpy DO's let the kids dive ????.

[Andy Nye]

Maybe i'm just biased, since children tend to annoy me anyway :o)

Comments like this doesn't do You or BSAC any good.

Tell ya what,,, i'm offering you a FREE dive with TAURUS DIVING, I'll have 2 boys with me aged 7 & 9 ...... But you will change that statement at a drop of a hat after a day out with me, them and other divers.

How about it ?

[Stuart Hayes]

:=<< Personal opinion, nothing to do with the club I'm a member of >>
:=
:=1. The junior MUST have a parent ("guardian") as a diving member of the club
:=
:=2. The guardian MUST be present for all in-water activities and all training

I agree with Nick the parent needs to be a Dive Leader or above.

Will the Old grumpy DO's let the kids dive ????.

Dano alas someone that has somethng senceable to say. All these comments. At the end of the day it would be down to individual clubs and there Instructors to decide whether or not they would be prepared to teach juniors. It is all down to the individual. Padi are prepared to teach them and reap the profits. So why shouldn'd we teach them to be safe divers from the start! And not on there 3rd qualification(Rescue Diver).And before anyone has a go about me slagging the Padi system off I AM NOT!! Any Instructors thinking about teaching juniors should think about attending a SITC (Snorkel Instructor Training Course) which are intended at teaching juniors 8+. I guarantee they will find this course both educational and informative.

[Stuart Hayes]

:=:=:=Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Marshalling 'em - as above.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Mike
:=:=
:=:=Hi Mike,
:=:=
:=:=It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC
:=:=
:=:=From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.
:=:=
:=:=Cheers..........Allan
:=
:=All this over lowering the age limit to 12. I have read what people have to say and some points I agree with. Why can't people understand that if/when it is passed it will be down to each individual club to decide if they want to teach scuba to junior members. I wish some of the dinosaurs out there would join the 21st century. I totally agree that members under 14 should be accompanied by a parent and instructor. I will be voting YES to the proposal as I have dived with many junior divers and consider them to be perfectly safe. Then again I have had a hand in their training. If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.

If....

Theres the nub Stuart. How do you know? Who checked it is safe and correct? The non-diving parent, the peole doing the training, or, for example, a trained BSAC inspection team?

It may not be the training that is the problem, but the unchecked environment in which it is done. This is unchecked for 14y/o, and looks likely to remain so for 12y/o.

Adrian

Adrian.
I agree with what you are saying, who will police the training standards. Regarding the junior divers i can only speak from my own experience.
Stuart

[Stuart Hayes]

If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.


Stuart,

Well, thank you. Gratuitous destructive criticism from a point of complete ignorance is so very welcome, and especially relished by volunteers.

I also have dived with junior divers and consider them safe. I have trained junior divers and find them exceptional students, yet I shall have nothing further to do with them and I shall now tell you why.

These are children. They are not small adults but potential adults. Regrettably, each is accompanied by one or even two appendages, a parent or two. These display classic behaviours of manipulating either student or teacher (sometimes both) in order to provide the outcome they desire, at a pace that they set and frequently in the manner they think best.

I say "No." to children because of the behaviours of parents.

That conclusion is personal and has the square-root of nothing to do with teaching technique or scuba. Your presumption does not aid your cause. It does serve to antagonise instructors who, by their nature, wish to facilitate learning and enjoyment of our sport. [I witheld my reason and experience earlier in order not to damage an argument I personally support, but before which when made so rudely, inaccurately and ineptly I shall not bow.]

Mike

Mike, We are all entitled to our personal views on the subject and as i have said it would be down to the individual to make the decision whether or not to teach juniors. My intention was/is not to antagonise anybody. I personally do not have a problem in teaching juniors to snorkel or scuba dive.
So may i apologise if i have offended anyone with my comments as they are purley based on personal experience!!!!!

[Bob Healey]

Hi, Allan,
:=
:=It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC
:=
Likewise, more or less.

:=From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.
:=
Likewise, more so !!

Mike ;-)

No one is asking anyone to take responsibility for the kids out of water that is a parental responsibility, we are a diving organisation not a child minding organisation.

Speaking as one who regularly takes groups of kids (8+) on weekend snorkelling trips it is a Branch rule that the Instructors take responsibility for the chilren whilst doing the Snorkelling activity and the parents responsibility to take care of them at other times. It has never been a problem, the parents enjoy coming along, and we enjoy the pub afterwards, usually in the company of parents and kids, including our own.

[David Walker]

:=Maybe i'm just biased, since children tend to annoy me anyway :o)

Comments like this doesn't do You or BSAC any good.

Sorry, i'm only joking - well half joking anyway... I would clarify my point further, but as its only my personal opinion I think it would probably be "hole-digging" more than anything else. All i'll say is that as i've been at a campus University for the past nearly three years, I don't see many of them, and when I do there're generally very loud an excitable on the bus at 8am when i'm trying to sleep (ok, my fault...) or hanging onto the side of a trolley in Asda blocking the aisles (why do people take their children shopping anyway?).

Tell ya what,,, i'm offering you a FREE dive with TAURUS DIVING, I'll have 2 boys with me aged 7 & 9 ...... But you will change that statement at a drop of a hat after a day out with me, them and other divers.

How about it ?

Ooooh, free diving... Unfortunately you're about 400 miles from me so not very practical. I'm sure your children are lovely though :O)

David


For Sale: Dive on Taurus - ?10! Just tell him your name's David ;) Sorry :O\

[Andy Wade]

:=:=<< Personal opinion, nothing to do with the club I'm a member of >>
:=:=
:=:=1. The junior MUST have a parent ("guardian") as a diving member of the club
:=:=
:=:=2. The guardian MUST be present for all in-water activities and all training
:=
:=I agree with Nick the parent needs to be a Dive Leader or above.
:=
:=Will the Old grumpy DO's let the kids dive ????.

Dano alas someone that has somethng senceable to say. All these comments. At the end of the day it would be down to individual clubs and there Instructors to decide whether or not they would be prepared to teach juniors. It is all down to the individual. Padi are prepared to teach them and reap the profits. So why shouldn'd we teach them to be safe divers from the start! And not on there 3rd qualification.And before anyone has a go about me slagging the Padi system off I AM NOT!! Any Instructors thinking about teaching juniors should think about attending a SITC (Snorkel Instructor Training Course) which are intended at teaching juniors 8+. I guarantee they will find this course both educational and informative.

I'd go further than that.
I think instructors should have to attend a BSAC training course specifically aimed at teaching children. Regardless of the fact that they can currently teach 14 years and above, I think it's time to bring all the legislation about children's issues, and dealing with parents, risk assessments and specific children/diving problems, and make them all into one Instructor course.
This would be BSAC leading from the front again.
This, coupled with the Junior BSAC outlined by Terry, makes for a watertight arrangement that any branch can invest in.

The old, old training system would have solved most of these problems, because they _had_ to learn to snorkel first, it teaches a lot of great skills that children don't have (nor do some adults - even after qualifying to dive), and if they attained Advanced Snorkel Diver before being allowed to learn SCUBA, you would know they were committed to it before their parents shell out for a lot of expensive children's diving gear.


.

[janos]

>>Any Instructors thinking about teaching juniors should think >>about attending a SITC (Snorkel Instructor Training Course) >>which are intended at teaching juniors 8+. I guarantee they >>will find this course both educational and informative.

I'd go further than that.
I think instructors should have to attend a BSAC training course specifically aimed at teaching children. Regardless of the fact that they can currently teach 14 years and above, I think it's time to bring all the legislation about children's issues, and dealing with parents, risk assessments and specific children/diving problems, and make them all into one Instructor course.



Personally I don't think this should be part of the standard OWI course. More of an additional thing if you want to marshall or teach under 18s, in the pool or not.

But the proposed motion doesn't address this. This stuff needs to be in place BEFORE the age limit is lowered.

Also, there's a lot going on in BSAC (revising SDCs, technical stuff, rebreathers, revision of the ITS) when are these standards going to be developed?

Laters,
Janos

[janos]

The old, old training system would have solved most of these problems, because they _had_ to learn to snorkel first, it teaches a lot of great skills that children don't have (nor do some adults - even after qualifying to dive), and if they attained Advanced Snorkel Diver before being allowed to learn SCUBA, you would know they were committed to it before their parents shell out for a lot of expensive children's diving gear.


The main issue is not whether we can teach U14s to dive, or how we teach them, but what procedures does a branch need to put in place to deal with having kids around.

Laters,
Janos

[Mike Halligan]

:=That conclusion is personal and has the square-root of nothing to do with teaching technique or scuba. Your presumption does not aid your cause. It does serve to antagonise instructors who, by their nature, wish to facilitate learning and enjoyment of our sport. [I witheld my reason and experience earlier in order not to damage an argument I personally support, but before which when made so rudely, inaccurately and ineptly I shall not bow.]
:=
Mike, We are all entitled to our personal views on the subject and as i have said it would be down to the individual to make the decision whether or not to teach juniors. My intention was/is not to antagonise anybody. I personally do not have a problem in teaching juniors to snorkel or scuba dive

Stuart,

Then you are to be congratulated for an effect diametrically opposed to your alleged intention. Ill-informed sniping at the voluntary effort of others is extremely offensive.

Pushy parents may do as they please to their offspring, but need not start on me. Until your post, I was about to vote once more in favour, but no longer. By all means allow 12 year-old membership and diving, but teaching sprogs in mainstream BSAC, never.

Mike

[Stuart Hayes]

:=The old, old training system would have solved most of these problems, because they _had_ to learn to snorkel first, it teaches a lot of great skills that children don't have (nor do some adults - even after qualifying to dive), and if they attained Advanced Snorkel Diver before being allowed to learn SCUBA, you would know they were committed to it before their parents shell out for a lot of expensive children's diving gear.


The main issue is not whether we can teach U14s to dive, or how we teach them, but what procedures does a branch need to put in place to deal with having kids around.

Laters,
Janos

Janos
I couldnt agree more, The procedure part of the process is very important. As a club all our Instructors are CRB checked. We have both a male and female welfare officer. We also get the parent involved where possible. We have found it works.At one of the other clubs of which i am a member we have a 14y old sports diver who joined with his father.They did the initial pool training together but rarely dive together.None of the members in the club have a problem diving with a junior.

[allan j bretherton]

:=The old, old training system would have solved most of these problems, because they _had_ to learn to snorkel first, it teaches a lot of great skills that children don't have (nor do some adults - even after qualifying to dive), and if they attained Advanced Snorkel Diver before being allowed to learn SCUBA, you would know they were committed to it before their parents shell out for a lot of expensive children's diving gear.


The main issue is not whether we can teach U14s to dive, or how we teach them, but what procedures does a branch need to put in place to deal with having kids around.

Laters,
Janos

Janos, et al,

Absolutely, and this just demonstrates the daftness of this proposal. If we accept the interpretation of the articles of association put forward by the proposers and supported by council then we are voting on something that already exists, i.e. councils right to create any new classes of membership it wishes so why do we need a vote? To gauge the opinions of the memberships? We?ve already had that twice, just with a different set of criterion for passing a motion.

The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18

1. Should the parent or guardian be a member of BSAC and the branch
2. Should the parent or guardian be present during all training
3. Should the parent or guardian be present during all branch activities

Also, we have to think about the instructor. OK, so we have the welfare of the vulnerable policy in place which by the way, also protects the vulnerable adult as well as minors but what protection do we have for the instructors? There are a lot of streetwise kids out there that will claim inappropriate behaviour just to get their own way and as a generalisation, the kid is always believed above the adult. It?s almost down to the adult to prove innocence rather than the authorities to prove guilt.

Just to clarify the point, I?m not against 12-year olds being taught how to dive. I taught my own daughter to dive when she was 12 albeit through a different agency and in tropical waters. The point in question is that we don?t appear to have the structure in place to teach minors until we generate a policy for teaching minors. Lets be honest, we have a policy in place for teaching disabled and a disabled awareness SDC but nothing for teaching minors. We also have a very detailed risk assessment policy that again covers everything except minors.

I?m in favour of taking 12-year olds but, and this is a big but, only under the right terms and conditions. It?s just not good enough for council to say (if the say anything) that it?s down to each branch, its not, and as governing body council should ensure a very clear directive of how this very sensitive subject will be addressed.

Cheers???Allan

[janos]

Janos
I couldnt agree more, The procedure part of the process is very important. As a club all our Instructors are CRB checked. We have both a male and female welfare officer. We also get the parent involved where possible. We have found it works.

Excellent news. I'm sure that your club (and others) is doing a very good job of it all. But what policies and procedures are there in place *NOW* to make sure that all clubs that want to take younger members will have to do similar things.

I am hugely in favour of opening up the membership of BSAC, but I would like to see those procedures in place *before* the age limit is lowered.

There's a lot going on in BSAC at the moment (rebreathers, trimix, revising SDCs, revising the ITS) and this seems to be another big and important job that we're giving to HQ and I'm not sure if the NDC and Council have the spare time.

---

So (thinking out loud here!) we have:

Option 1) Council put in place regulations to make sure that clubs that teach minors are abiding by the WoV regs and enforce them. BSAC membership opened to U12

Option 2) Status Quo

Option 3) Membership opened to U12, but regulations stay as they are.

I would prefer option 1). Can take or leave option 2), but am anti option 3).

Problem is, by voting yes I don't know whether I'm getting option 1 or option 3. I'm expecting several people to say "If you vote yes you'll get option 1" or "Option 1 was the intention of the motion" but I'm not sure that it will happen in practice.

Janos

[nick kay]

The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18

>> Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...

Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...

[Adrian Kelland]

:=The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18

>> Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...

Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...

Hmm, interesting point.

I can't find anything to say that the 17y/o could not be a DL/OWI instructing a 14y/o. AFAIUI that 17y/o does not require supervision. Yet the 17y/o is still a minor.

Another inconsistency - a Snorkel Instructor has to be 18, an OWI has no age requirement.

<a href="http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm" >http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm</a>

I wonder if there is anything in the welfare policy re minor/minor instructor/student pairings?

Adrian

[allan j bretherton]

:=:=The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18
:=
:=&gt;&gt; Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...
:=
:=Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...

Hmm, interesting point.

I can't find anything to say that the 17y/o could not be a DL/OWI instructing a 14y/o. AFAIUI that 17y/o does not require supervision. Yet the 17y/o is still a minor.

Another inconsistency - a Snorkel Instructor has to be 18, an OWI has no age requirement.

http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm

I wonder if there is anything in the welfare policy re minor/minor instructor/student pairings?

Adrian

Actually, there is an age requirement of 18 to be an OWI

Allan

[Stuart Hayes]

:=Janos
:= I couldnt agree more, The procedure part of the process is very important. As a club all our Instructors are CRB checked. We have both a male and female welfare officer. We also get the parent involved where possible. We have found it works.

Excellent news. I'm sure that your club (and others) is doing a very good job of it all. But what policies and procedures are there in place *NOW* to make sure that all clubs that want to take younger members will have to do similar things.

I am hugely in favour of opening up the membership of BSAC, but I would like to see those procedures in place *before* the age limit is lowered.

There's a lot going on in BSAC at the moment (rebreathers, trimix, revising SDCs, revising the ITS) and this seems to be another big and important job that we're giving to HQ and I'm not sure if the NDC and Council have the spare time.

---

So (thinking out loud here!) we have:

Option 1) Council put in place regulations to make sure that clubs that teach minors are abiding by the WoV regs and enforce them. BSAC membership opened to U12

Option 2) Status Quo

Option 3) Membership opened to U12, but regulations stay as they are.

I would prefer option 1). Can take or leave option 2), but am anti option 3).

Problem is, by voting yes I don't know whether I'm getting option 1 or option 3. I'm expecting several people to say "If you vote yes you'll get option 1" or "Option 1 was the intention of the motion" but I'm not sure that it will happen in practice.

Janos

In a real world it would be nice to see guidlines put into place.( I won't say set rules and regulations because anyone that has had dealings with junior members will know they will not work.) Teaching junior members is all about flexibility and understanding. No 2 chirldren learn at the same rate or understand things in the same way.Theory needs to be taught at a different level than you would to an adult.Terminoligy and explanations DO take alittle longer.
An idea would be for BSAC to speak to the branches that currently have junior members. That mite help to put guidelines into place. Another idea would be for the diving side to talk to the snorkling side to see how they teach juniors 8+. At the end of the day we are one big club, It would be nice to see the wall between the two parties eventualy be taken down.

[Adrian Kelland]

:=:=:=The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18
:=:=
:=:=&gt;&gt; Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...
:=:=
:=:=Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...
:=
:=Hmm, interesting point.
:=
:=I can't find anything to say that the 17y/o could not be a DL/OWI instructing a 14y/o. AFAIUI that 17y/o does not require supervision. Yet the 17y/o is still a minor.
:=
:=Another inconsistency - a Snorkel Instructor has to be 18, an OWI has no age requirement.
:=
:= http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm
:=
:=I wonder if there is anything in the welfare policy re minor/minor instructor/student pairings?
:=
:=Adrian

Actually, there is an age requirement of 18 to be an OWI

Allan

Good Allan, just a shame our publication does not say so. Found it at last down in the examinations section. So an U18 can only do the courses.

Adrian

[allan j bretherton]

:=:=:=:=The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18
:=:=:=
:=:=:=&gt;&gt; Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...
:=:=:=
:=:=:=Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...
:=:=
:=:=Hmm, interesting point.
:=:=
:=:=I can't find anything to say that the 17y/o could not be a DL/OWI instructing a 14y/o. AFAIUI that 17y/o does not require supervision. Yet the 17y/o is still a minor.
:=:=
:=:=Another inconsistency - a Snorkel Instructor has to be 18, an OWI has no age requirement.
:=:=
:=:= http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm
:=:=
:=:=I wonder if there is anything in the welfare policy re minor/minor instructor/student pairings?
:=:=
:=:=Adrian
:=
:=Actually, there is an age requirement of 18 to be an OWI
:=
:=Allan

Good Allan, just a shame our publication does not say so. Found it at last down in the examinations section. So an U18 can only do the courses.

Adrian

Hi Adrian,

It is just a little difficult to navigate around certain parts of this site. I'm lucky in that I can draw on 16 years experience of teaching on the ITS

Cheers........Allan

[janos]

In a real world it would be nice to see guidlines put into place.( I won't say set rules and regulations because anyone that has had dealings with junior members will know they will not work.) Teaching junior members is all about flexibility and understanding.

I think we're talking at cross purposes here. You seem to be talking about the actual teaching. I'm talking more about Welfare of the Vunerable regulations that other bodies that deal with children use.

Laters,
Janos

[janos]

An idea would be for BSAC to speak to the branches that currently have junior members. That mite help to put guidelines into place. Another idea would be for the diving side to talk to the snorkling side to see how they teach juniors 8+. At the end of the day we are one big club, It would be nice to see the wall between the two parties eventualy be taken down.

And (IMHO) this needs to be done before we admit 12 year olds.

Laters,
Janos

[Adrian Kelland]

Hi Adrian,

It is just a little difficult to navigate around certain parts of this site. I'm lucky in that I can draw on 16 years experience of teaching on the ITS

Cheers........Allan

Blimey, ITS helps with BSAC site navigation. Must be an AI course ;-)

The site can be a little frustrating.

Adrian

[Andy Wade]

&gt;&gt;Any Instructors thinking about teaching juniors should think &gt;&gt;about attending a SITC (Snorkel Instructor Training Course) &gt;&gt;which are intended at teaching juniors 8+. I guarantee they &gt;&gt;will find this course both educational and informative.
:=
:=I'd go further than that.
:=I think instructors should have to attend a BSAC training course specifically aimed at teaching children. Regardless of the fact that they can currently teach 14 years and above, I think it's time to bring all the legislation about children's issues, and dealing with parents, risk assessments and specific children/diving problems, and make them all into one Instructor course.



Personally I don't think this should be part of the standard OWI course. More of an additional thing if you want to marshall or teach under 18s, in the pool or not.

Agreed, I think it should be a course for people who are already instructors who wish to teach minors. That was my proposal.

But the proposed motion doesn't address this. This stuff needs to be in place BEFORE the age limit is lowered.

This is really down to council to set up criteria for the implementation, which I assume would be done under the NDO and NDC.



.

[Andy Wade]

:=The old, old training system would have solved most of these problems, because they _had_ to learn to snorkel first, it teaches a lot of great skills that children don't have (nor do some adults - even after qualifying to dive), and if they attained Advanced Snorkel Diver before being allowed to learn SCUBA, you would know they were committed to it before their parents shell out for a lot of expensive children's diving gear.


The main issue is not whether we can teach U14s to dive, or how we teach them, but what procedures does a branch need to put in place to deal with having kids around.


IMO it's all part of the same thing, you can't have the teaching and the safeguards for minors without the qualified instructors to implement it. Hence my proposal for a separate course for instructors alongside something along the lines of a Junior BSAC status for their branch.


.

[nick kay]

&gt;&gt; Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...

Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...

Actually, there is an age requirement of 18 to be an OWI
(Apologies - I should have made that clear in the original post)..

The point was therefore that the 17yr old couldn't be an NQI (due to not being 18), but they'd be capable of teaching someone older AND they'd need their parent in the water (who could be less qualified) AND they'd need the supervision of a full NQI...

[Stuart Hayes]

:=In a real world it would be nice to see guidlines put into place.( I won't say set rules and regulations because anyone that has had dealings with junior members will know they will not work.) Teaching junior members is all about flexibility and understanding.

I think we're talking at cross purposes here. You seem to be talking about the actual teaching. I'm talking more about Welfare of the Vunerable regulations that other bodies that deal with children use.

Laters,
Janos

My appologies if i was misleading. I was taking it that all clubs already have a Welfare officer and have copies of WELFARE OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE IN SNORKELLING AND SCUBA DIVING. This book is available FOC fron HQ.

Stuart

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

A lot of interesting thoughts and comments have been coming out, mainly relating to tuition. Tuition is only a small part of it, I suspect that some 12yo?s would be coming along with their parents already trained via other agencies with several dives to their credit, or what do we do with them once we?ve trained them?.

So I would like to pose the question about general limits for 12yo divers. At present we accept 14yo?s at OD level with no additional limits, what (if any) changed or additional limits and branch diving procedures would people like to see placed on qualified 12yo divers within a branch?

We?re talking hypothetically of course, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means and there are no ?right? or ?wrong? answers. But what are the groups views on 12yo vs 14yo general diving within a branch? What, if anything do you think needs changing for either or both groups of young divers?

Thanks

Keith L

[Stuart Hayes]

A lot of interesting thoughts and comments have been coming out, mainly relating to tuition. Tuition is only a small part of it, I suspect that some 12yo?s would be coming along with their parents already trained via other agencies with several dives to their credit, or what do we do with them once we?ve trained them?.

So I would like to pose the question about general limits for 12yo divers. At present we accept 14yo?s at OD level with no additional limits, what (if any) changed or additional limits and branch diving procedures would people like to see placed on qualified 12yo divers within a branch?

We?re talking hypothetically of course, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means and there are no ?right? or ?wrong? answers. But what are the groups views on 12yo vs 14yo general diving within a branch? What, if anything do you think needs changing for either or both groups of young divers?

Thanks

Keith L

Interesting point. Yes guidelines need to be imposed on depth limits. But that may discourage other divers from wanting to dive with a junior if say a max depth of 14m was imposed.Would in not be better to keep the depth limit to the grade OD 20m But stipulate that a parent or/and Instructor be present on all dives until such time they have built up some experience.Other agencies use this practice and i am lead to believe it works.
Stuart

[janos]

My appologies if i was misleading. I was taking it that all clubs already have a Welfare officer and have copies of WELFARE OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE IN SNORKELLING AND SCUBA DIVING. This book is available FOC fron HQ.

I'm afraid that my club doesn't have a Welfare Officer, and I've read the guidelines on the internet in the past couple of weeks, prompted by this thread. However, to be fair, we (currently) don't have any U18 members.

My concern is that there will be other clubs out there who are similarly not aware, but are quite happy doing their own thing in blissfull ignorance of what is required.

Laters,
Janos

[TerryH]

So I would like to pose the question about general limits for 12yo divers. At present we accept 14yo?s at OD level with no additional limits, what (if any) changed or additional limits and branch diving procedures would people like to see placed on qualified 12yo divers within a branch?

We?re talking hypothetically of course, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means and there are no ?right? or ?wrong? answers. But what are the groups views on 12yo vs 14yo general diving within a branch? What, if anything do you think needs changing for either or both groups of young divers?

Thanks

Keith L

All IMO of course and at the very least.
1) All teaching to be done by an NQI.
No good having ADI's under supervison or well meaning parent/
Dive Leaders etc. Ok it's a long term aim of BSAC to have all
teaching done by NQI's, but in this instance it absolutely
must be.
2) Just not happy with the same NQI being asked by the club to
teach children without fully uinderstanding whats involved.
That applies to 14yo as much well as 12 yo. Times have changed
along with legistration and the only way is to formalise
the info. So have a one day attendance only SDC for those NQI's
that want to teach kids. WOV, risk assessment, AV/CPR on minors
etc. Put the whole lot together and you have a reasonable
grounding in what's required. If it all works then like 1st Aid
etc, a refresher every 3 years to ensure everything is bang up
to date.

Doesnt have to be just for NQI's either. Maybe club officers
would like clarification of there liabilities and even parents might like to know what the GB position is.

So at the very least the framework for &gt;14 & 12&gt; should include
a formal course. No exam or anything and not club based, but
a BSAC GB central admin type effort.

TerryH

[Tony F]

Despite being firmly in the yes camp I would then be arguing for a gentle and steady approach to depth limits.

I see this as a great way to pacify those who still believe there are medical issues for 12 & 13 year olds and the logic is that although other agencies allow these age groups deeper they may not be dealing with UK conditions.

Allowing 12 & 13 year olds to qualify at OD level but with a depth restriction of 12 metres until 14 is my view. Additionally I'd allow qualified 12 & 13 year olds to undertake theory and pool training for SD, but now permit the OW qualifying dives until they're 14.

This still moves us a long way forward bringing all inland, many shore and some boat dives within the reach of these youngsters.

When they then subsequently qualify at SD level they're going to be more experienced than many new SDs.

[allan j bretherton]

:=
:=So I would like to pose the question about general limits for 12yo divers. At present we accept 14yo?s at OD level with no additional limits, what (if any) changed or additional limits and branch diving procedures would people like to see placed on qualified 12yo divers within a branch?
:=
:=We?re talking hypothetically of course, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means and there are no ?right? or ?wrong? answers. But what are the groups views on 12yo vs 14yo general diving within a branch? What, if anything do you think needs changing for either or both groups of young divers?
:=
:=Thanks
:=
:=Keith L

All IMO of course and at the very least.
1) All teaching to be done by an NQI.
No good having ADI's under supervison or well meaning parent/
Dive Leaders etc. Ok it's a long term aim of BSAC to have all
teaching done by NQI's, but in this instance it absolutely
must be.
2) Just not happy with the same NQI being asked by the club to
teach children without fully uinderstanding whats involved.
That applies to 14yo as much well as 12 yo. Times have changed
along with legistration and the only way is to formalise
the info. So have a one day attendance only SDC for those NQI's
that want to teach kids. WOV, risk assessment, AV/CPR on minors
etc. Put the whole lot together and you have a reasonable
grounding in what's required. If it all works then like 1st Aid
etc, a refresher every 3 years to ensure everything is bang up
to date.

Doesnt have to be just for NQI's either. Maybe club officers
would like clarification of there liabilities and even parents might like to know what the GB position is.

So at the very least the framework for &gt;14 & 12&gt; should include
a formal course. No exam or anything and not club based, but
a BSAC GB central admin type effort.

TerryH

Hi Terry,

I'm getting really worried, I'm agreeing with almost everything you are saying :-) the only difference for me is that I would include all minors, not just 12 - 14 year olds

Cheers........Allan

[Bob Healey]

:=
:=So I would like to pose the question about general limits for 12yo divers. At present we accept 14yo?s at OD level with no additional limits, what (if any) changed or additional limits and branch diving procedures would people like to see placed on qualified 12yo divers within a branch?
:=
:=We?re talking hypothetically of course, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means and there are no ?right? or ?wrong? answers. But what are the groups views on 12yo vs 14yo general diving within a branch? What, if anything do you think needs changing for either or both groups of young divers?
:=
:=Thanks
:=
:=Keith L

All IMO of course and at the very least.
1) All teaching to be done by an NQI.
No good having ADI's under supervison or well meaning parent/
Dive Leaders etc. Ok it's a long term aim of BSAC to have all
teaching done by NQI's, but in this instance it absolutely
must be.
2) Just not happy with the same NQI being asked by the club to
teach children without fully uinderstanding whats involved.
That applies to 14yo as much well as 12 yo. Times have changed
along with legistration and the only way is to formalise
the info. So have a one day attendance only SDC for those NQI's
that want to teach kids. WOV, risk assessment, AV/CPR on minors
etc. Put the whole lot together and you have a reasonable
grounding in what's required. If it all works then like 1st Aid
etc, a refresher every 3 years to ensure everything is bang up
to date.

Doesnt have to be just for NQI's either. Maybe club officers
would like clarification of there liabilities and even parents might like to know what the GB position is.

So at the very least the framework for &gt;14 & 12&gt; should include
a formal course. No exam or anything and not club based, but
a BSAC GB central admin type effort.

TerryH

This is where the SITC and the IFC differ, the SITC aims at teaching children, young adults and adults whilst the IFC is aimed at teaching Adults. Perhaps all would be Scuba Instructors wanting to teach 12 plus should attend an SITC first?

[TerryH]

This is where the SITC and the IFC differ, the SITC aims at teaching children, young adults and adults whilst the IFC is aimed at teaching Adults. Perhaps all would be Scuba Instructors wanting to teach 12 plus should attend an SITC first?


Both SITC and IFC are for would be instructors.
Regardless of the content of the SIFC the benchmark must be
an NQI to teach scuba to under 18's let alone 12-14 year olds.

If you accept that principle, then you then have to accept
that many NQI's have been teaching for years and would
only need clarification of the issues to do with minors.
Attendance of an SITC would I believe have the wrong emphasis
and have too much of the core content on snorkelling rather
than what we are talking about.

It might cover some of the issues, but would dilute the
message.

Bit like doing DPM & CPF. You do chartwork in DPM, but
nowhere near as much as in CPF.
Besides not a lot of stuff on scuba in the SITC and that's
what most of these kids want to be doing.

TerryH

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

All IMO of course and at the very least.

Terry... please... virtually this entire thread has been taken up with instruction issues, you have covered all of this above. I asked specifically about general diving limits, can you try and relate your thoughts to that question.

Keith L

[Adrian Kelland]

I cannot think of a reason why age should automatically be linked to any additional limit on top of those applied by qualification.

If a 13y/o passes the requirements for OD/SD etc, then that is what should govern their depths.

Now if you believe that the 13y/o should have an additional depth limit as a result of their age, then what is the real reason for that limit?

If it is health based, then perhaps you should not be supporting the motion at all. AFAIK, immunity to heath risks has nothing to do with anniversaries of birth date. If they are likely to be at risk at a particular depth when 13 years 364 days, this risk will not have changed a day later.

If you believe it is maturity based, similar reasoning applies. The DO/DM on the day can say yes/no to any diver on any particular dive for whatever reason you will accept (or not). If on their 13th birthday, they emerge Kevin-like from a cocoon with the cry 'I hate you' just don't let them dive. This kind of rule should be applied more often to adult divers too.

Is there anything in OD training that implicitly leads to an age based limitation of depth? I can't think of anything.

If a 13 y/o passes the training requirements for OD, then that is what they are.

I think that any depth limitation that is applied is as a result of failure to believe that diving is really safe at all for children of this particular age group. Hedgeing their bets if you like.

Adrian

[alison boler]

Here is what I would put in place for the under 18s - not just for the under 14s.
1. Parental consent before training and before every open water dive.
2. All teaching to be by NQIs. All open water teaching to be by NQIs who are at least BSAC Open Water Instructors.
3. The under 18s should be accompanied on any open water dive by a qualified adult diver.
4. The under 14s should be restricted to a maximum depth of 15m.
5. The under 14s should not be able to qualify beyond the grade of BSAC Ocean Diver.

I wonder if the under 18s should be able to qualify beyond Sports Diver... I don't like setting restrictions on qualification. My gut feeling is that if someone can do something to the required standard, we should let them. However, is it right that someone who is not an adult should be put "in charge" of someone else, which is what a Dive Leader should be? No. probably not. Hmmm. Leave that one to Council to decide.

Adrian, you suggest that setting a depth limit for the under 14s is a "hedging of bets". I don't think it is. You might as well say that the setting of a depth limit for say Ocean Divers (for example) is "a failure to believe that diving is really safe for...them". Surely we set depth limits in a common sense attempt to ensure that a given group of divers with a given level of training have the maximum chance possible of enjoying a safe dive - it's a risk minimiser. We want the under 18s to be able to learn to dive and we want to enable them to do so in the safest way possible. It is undoubtedly safer to restrict their depth whilst they are gaining experience and maturity. They can still dive, which is the important thing.

There are a couple of things that I think the BSAC ought to put in place for branches/schools whether or not this motion passes - because it ought to be there for the under 18s anyway.

1. A Risk Awareness Statement. There should be a clear statement worded by HQ provided to Branches to give to parents and minors who wish to learn to dive. This document should spell out the risks in a clear and factual manner as far as possible without being scaremongery. It ought to be a standard document. The Branch instructor should go through this document with the parents and child. Parents should sign this on behalf of the child, who should also sign it.
2. There also ought to be some guidance given to branches on how to judge "readiness to dive" in a minor. Most agencies supply this to their instructors in the form of a suggested question and answer discussion with the minor and also with the parent. It helps to weed out any "pushy parent/unwilling kid" scenario.
There are some suggested formats for these documents on the diveinstruct.org.uk website which are based on those used by other teaching agencies. They're a couple of years old now so probably need updating. The Risk Awareness Statement will be found under Tab: Risk. The Readiness to Dive under Questions.

Anyway, all IMO of course - am very happy to leave this to Council and NDC who I am confident will put the right programme in place.
Allie

[Stuart Hayes]

If a 13 y/o passes the training requirements for OD, then that is what they are.

I think that any depth limitation that is applied is as a result of failure to believe that diving is really safe at all for children of this particular age group. Hedgeing their bets if you like.

Adrian

Adrian
Well said!! and i totaly agree. In our club we have a 14yr old SPORTS diver. Who i will say is a better diver than several adults i could mention. Restricted limits should only be implied on a individual basis at the descression of the instructor(s) they trained with. We all kno that no two juniors are the same (temprement, maturity,etc,etc).

For the undecided/confused out there can i ask a couple of question's

1) Does your club have a Welfare officer?

2) Have you read Welfare of Vulnerable People ( Procedures & Guidlines for BSAC Branches)? Which is available from HQ and is on the site.

The latter may answer some of the question people are unsure about. It will also show that BSAC have thought about the prospects of teaching vulnerable (junior) students.

[Adrian Kelland]

Adrian, you suggest that setting a depth limit for the under 14s is a "hedging of bets". I don't think it is. You might as well say that the setting of a depth limit for say Ocean Divers (for example) is "a failure to believe that diving is really safe for...them". Surely we set depth limits in a common sense attempt to ensure that a given group of divers with a given level of training have the maximum chance possible of enjoying a safe dive - it's a risk minimiser. We want the under 18s to be able to learn to dive and we want to enable them to do so in the safest way possible. It is undoubtedly safer to restrict their depth whilst they are gaining experience and maturity. They can still dive, which is the important thing.

I would say that the existing depth limit was "the skills you have been taught make it safer to this level". We then teach further skills to make further depth progression safer. I do hope the existing limits are not based on any other artificial criteria.

I am rather under the impression that the depth limit on OD was skills related, not age. If you teach a 12y/o and an 18y/o the same OD skills and they can do them to the same degree and both pass the test to the same degree, they are the same type of OD. They may have the same level of experience and possibly maturity.

Then you say to the 12y/o, you can only dive to 14m. Why? They are at exactly the same level of diving ability. (The 12y/o may well have passed with higher marks and ability.)

If you introduce any limit based on age, then perhaps our existing limit of 14 is correct, or at least 'safer' than 12.

Adrian

[Nigel Hewitt]

If you introduce any limit based on age, then perhaps our existing limit of 14 is correct, or at least 'safer' than 12.

Remembering what I was like in my 20s I was thinking of something more like 35.

[Adrian Kelland]

:=If you introduce any limit based on age, then perhaps our existing limit of 14 is correct, or at least 'safer' than 12.

Remembering what I was like in my 20s I was thinking of something more like 35.

No bike licence unless over 60 accompanied by both parents ;-)

[janos]

And I agree with both of you!

I would add that any Marshall on a (non-training) trip should have a similar qualification or there should be a suitabley qualified person on the trip.

As an observation, the conclusion of this is then that U18s cannot become Dive Leaders as they are not able to marshall a trip.

I am undecided if this is right or wrong.

Laters,
Janos

[Ben Field]

&gt; 2. All teaching to be by NQIs. All open water teaching to be &gt; by NQIs who are at least BSAC Open Water Instructors.

So a 30yr old AD ACI with 500 dives in their log is now not enough to teach a 17yr old but a 19yr old SD OWI with 100dives is? But the 30yr old can help train the 19yr old for his DL?

Isn't that just a way of squeezing ACI out of training by the side door?

The issue under debate is what younger divers should be allowed to do within a practical limited framework not who should do it too them? (so to speak)

&gt; However, is it right that someone who is not an adult should &gt; be put "in charge" of someone else, which is what a Dive
&gt; Leader should be? No. probably not. Hmmm. Leave that one
&gt; to Council to decide.

Sorry why? They need membership guidance on this otherwise why have an AGM and this motion in the first place- lets just throw ideas at the council and let them decide willy-nilly shall we?

&gt; 2. There also ought to be some guidance given to branches on &gt; how to judge "readiness to dive" in a minor. Most agencies
&gt; supply this to their instructors in the form of a suggested
&gt; question and answer discussion with the minor and also with
&gt; the parent. It helps to weed out any "pushy parent/unwilling &gt; kid" scenario.

I couldn't agree more with that.

&gt; Anyway, all IMO of course - am very happy to leave this to
&gt; Council and NDC who I am confident will put the right
&gt; programme in place.

I'm sure they will, once we've chosen the path for them, fingers crossed sanity will prevail.

BEN

[Andy Wade]

And I agree with both of you!

I would add that any Marshall on a (non-training) trip should have a similar qualification or there should be a suitabley qualified person on the trip.

As an observation, the conclusion of this is then that U18s cannot become Dive Leaders as they are not able to marshall a trip.

I am undecided if this is right or wrong.

I agree.
But I'm sure that U18's should not become Dive Leaders as they theoretically could be in charge of minors, and I'd insist that it should be an adult. Which means over 18 years old.


.

[TerryH]

:=All IMO of course and at the very least.

Terry... please... virtually this entire thread has been taken up with instruction issues, you have covered all of this above. I asked specifically about general diving limits, can you try and relate your thoughts to that question.

Keith L

Sorry Keith
Thought "additional limits and branch diving procedures"
included teaching standards.

Ok lets ignore what PADI and other agencies do (12m for junior).
We after all are 2m deeper than PADI on OD and just after Sport
can be 10m less, so a direct comparison is unneccessary.

I'd also forget clear water training. It is after the BRITISH
sub aqua club so UK waters must be our first concern.

If we are going to do this, we can take on board the
experience of pro-BSAC schools, but doesnt mean we have to
copy them.

First if they join, they are going to have to be trained.
If we apply the usual "same as or equivilent to those you were
trained in" maxim, the training depth sets the diving depth.

That is where we should have the initial emphisis.

So ...
a) How are we going to teach OD with a depth restriction
and how can we progress to SD with OD being restrictive?

You teach OD and set the limit at say 12m. You can still do
most of the skills and only miss out on 2x 20m dives. Can
still do simulated 20m (like the old simulated deco dive in
Sport), but it's still 12m.

Ok, now you can go on to Sport or can you?
Pool is ok, so is the Rescue assessment. Some of the skills
again not a problem at 12m, but now you have another 2x
dives to do at 20m.

Logic says we keep this limit and have a top up once they
reach 14 (or maybe even 16). That = 4x dives to be done at
20m to be able to dive at 20m. That's 2 days and in effect
another course. DO's and TO's are not going to let this
go without doing SO1 of Sport and maybe even more "just in
case".

We cant just give them the grade on 1 or 2x 20m dives, because
that isnt the Sport syllabus.

The new diver shouldnt be that bothered anyway as no matter
what he is stuck at 12m.

So if you havent fallen asleep by now.

I'd go for a new 12 year old to be taught all elements of OD
and resticted to 12m. When he/she reaches 14, 2x dives at 20m
increases it to a full OD 20m rating.

As a Junior OD he/she can start Sport training in the pool,
but not undertake any open water sport training until the
2x 20m dives and full OD status is acheived.

This covers one important point. If you have no rescue skills
as per OD, then as a DM you are going to be very selective
where you dive and how you buddy people up. A 12m rated Junior
OD will not have any skills and will be watched/monitored
because of it. This appeases all those that may not be happy
with the abilty of small kids doing rescues.

So my vote is for a 12m limit & a new grade of Junior OD.
No Open water sport until full OD (at 14) has been awarded.

Bit of a ramble, but hey!

Rgds
TerryH

[Adrian Kelland]

&gt; 2. All teaching to be by NQIs. All open water teaching to be &gt; by NQIs who are at least BSAC Open Water Instructors.

So a 30yr old AD ACI with 500 dives in their log is now not enough to teach a 17yr old but a 19yr old SD OWI with 100dives is? But the 30yr old can help train the 19yr old for his DL?

Isn't that just a way of squeezing ACI out of training by the side door?

No, where does it say that? Why shouldn't there be a restriction on the lower qualified instructors to teach minors? I am one of those lower instructors and have no problem with that. This is all about the suitability of those in positions of responsibility over minors as well. That suitability may or may not include the Instructor Qualification.

It may well be that an 18+ ACI with an 'Instructing Minors' endorsement could teach minors, whereas a NI without that endorsement could not. Who knows. All these suggestions are coming from the membership - not dictat from above.

The issue under debate is what younger divers should be allowed to do within a practical limited framework not who should do it too them? (so to speak)

Part of that framework IS 'who should do it to them'. How can it be otherwise. This debate is also showing up a few inconsistencies with the existing framework when applied to U18s. Thus they have to be debated too.

&gt; However, is it right that someone who is not an adult should &gt; be put "in charge" of someone else, which is what a Dive
&gt; Leader should be? No. probably not. Hmmm. Leave that one
&gt; to Council to decide.

Sorry why? They need membership guidance on this otherwise why have an AGM and this motion in the first place- lets just throw ideas at the council and let them decide willy-nilly shall we?

That is in effect what the proposal says. However I doubt that any decision will be willy-nilly.

&gt; 2. There also ought to be some guidance given to branches on &gt; how to judge "readiness to dive" in a minor. Most agencies
&gt; supply this to their instructors in the form of a suggested
&gt; question and answer discussion with the minor and also with
&gt; the parent. It helps to weed out any "pushy parent/unwilling &gt; kid" scenario.

I couldn't agree more with that.

&gt; Anyway, all IMO of course - am very happy to leave this to
&gt; Council and NDC who I am confident will put the right
&gt; programme in place.

I'm sure they will, once we've chosen the path for them, fingers crossed sanity will prevail.

BEN

If we have to choose every single path that Council is to go down, then they are not required. We elect such members to speed up decision making. It is bad enough getting a committee of 12 to make a decision, let alone a committee of 30,000 meeting once a year.

Adrian

[TerryH]

So a 30yr old AD ACI with 500 dives in their log is now not enough to teach a 17yr old but a 19yr old SD OWI with 100dives is? But the 30yr old can help train the 19yr old for his DL?


Absolutely.

Your 500 Dive AD/ACI has the experience, but that doesnt make
him an Instructor or even a good diver (for that matter).
All he has done is gone on a 2x day attendence course.
In your scenario even that is old. ACI hasnt been done for
2-3 years now.

On the other hand your DL/OWI (cant have a SPT/OWI - DL
minimum) has done his ADI, then OWIC, TIE & PIE and been
assessed as an Instructor.

The assumption that just because somebody has shedloads of
dives they are good Instructors just isnt true.

Besdides a 30 year old AD/ACI with 500 dives is very likely
to have old rescue/1st aid skills compared to your younger
(and more upto date) DL/OWI.

Give me the 19 year old OWI anyday.

TerryH

[matt]

This whole discussion is scareing me silly however...

I am rather under the impression that the depth limit on OD was skills related, not age. If you teach a 12y/o and an 18y/o the same OD skills and they can do them to the same degree and both pass the test to the same degree, they are the same type of OD. They may have the same level of experience and possibly maturity.

Just a tiny point, but I thought hyperbaric Nitrogen was considered narcotic!

Any comments.

[Andy Nye]

Absolutely. Terry.

The assumption that just because somebody has shedloads of
dives they are good Instructors just isnt true.

** Thats ME, 1,000's of VARIED dives, NO warm clear water dives, 5 attempts of the old CLUB INSTRUCTOR and never went passed ACI or Dive Leader **


Give me the 19 year old OWI anyday.

** Disagree mate,,,, can't see many 19 y/o OWI with a great deal of dives and experience. ( thats my personal opinion, before i get flamed ).

There are older instructors about nowadays that are not up to date with modern diving and haven't got a clue, which does make the 19 Y/O an asset to any club and learning / gaining knowledge that they are passing on all the time.

Andy

[TerryH]

:=Absolutely. Terry.

Give me the 19 year old OWI anyday.

** Disagree mate,,,, can't see many 19 y/o OWI with a great deal of dives and experience. ( thats my personal opinion, before i get flamed ).


Yeah, but it was a pretty keen an bang up to date 19 year
old with 100 dives. Would be diferent if it was bare minimum
30 odd.

T.

[joanne rothwell]

I've only just seen this thread on the forum, but I would just like to add a couple of points.Very sorry if these points have already been raised!
We have had to point a few people in the PADI direction because adults wanted to learn with their 10/12 year olds-so the reducing of age would benefit membership....however, we have also had a few members join who are 14 years old, without parents and there are always a few problems, which through discussion, we have almost concluded that it may not be worth taking youngsters like this to train.
The main problems are;
Getting a commitment from the parents to bring their child up regularly or to make sure the child does attend regularly.
Making the parent understand that the club is not just a club where they can leave the child and not have to have any other involvment.
The point needed to be stressed that once learnt, the parent could not just leave the child on trips etc, that there has to be some sort of parental supervision.
Unless the child had a parent/guardian learning with them, the logistics of teaching and safety of the child becomes quite difficult!
Maybe if the age was lowered, these points should be taken into account?

[Andy Wade]

I've only just seen this thread on the forum, but I would just like to add a couple of points.Very sorry if these points have already been raised!
We have had to point a few people in the PADI direction because adults wanted to learn with their 10/12 year olds-so the reducing of age would benefit membership....however, we have also had a few members join who are 14 years old, without parents and there are always a few problems, which through discussion, we have almost concluded that it may not be worth taking youngsters like this to train.
The main problems are;
Getting a commitment from the parents to bring their child up regularly or to make sure the child does attend regularly.
Making the parent understand that the club is not just a club where they can leave the child and not have to have any other involvment.
The point needed to be stressed that once learnt, the parent could not just leave the child on trips etc, that there has to be some sort of parental supervision.
Unless the child had a parent/guardian learning with them, the logistics of teaching and safety of the child becomes quite difficult!
Maybe if the age was lowered, these points should be taken into account?

Well they've been raised in the past if not in this particular thread. They are still all valid points.
There needs to be a framework in place to protect the branch/DO/instructor who wants to say no to accepting a child for training.
As Mike Halligan has stated, some parents can be pushy to the extreme in that they even try to influence the training, which is the other end of the stick that you have experienced with parents potentially leaving their children with you, using the branch as a creche.
In a lot of respects the idea of a Junior BSAC status for branches would ensure that they are fully prepared for these eventualities, with all people concerned being aware and qualified to say no or yes to any prospective minor wishing to learn to dive.
There's an outline questionnaire in this page (see link below) that starts to address the subject for branches.
(Questionnaire by courtesy of Alison Boler)


.

[Stuart Hayes]

Well they've been raised in the past if not in this particular thread. They are still all valid points.
There needs to be a framework in place to protect the branch/DO/instructor who wants to say no to accepting a child for training.
As Mike Halligan has stated, some parents can be pushy to the extreme in that they even try to influence the training, which is the other end of the stick that you have experienced with parents potentially leaving their children with you, using the branch as a creche.
In a lot of respects the idea of a Junior BSAC status for branches would ensure that they are fully prepared for these eventualities, with all people concerned being aware and qualified to say no or yes to any prospective minor wishing to learn to dive.

The frame work is already in place to say no.If passed as an instructor you still have the right to say no to teaching juniors. The request to lower the age for scuba is for the people/clubs that want to teach juniors.Nobody is saying that we all have to teach juniors. Some clubs may wish to teach juniors others may not.That descision is down to each and every individual/club to decide if they want to or not.
As an Instructor you go away for a weekend training first day no problem, at the night you have one to many beers,come the second day you do not feel like diving/instructing. You have the right to say NO to doing it. The same applies to teaching juniors. You only have to do it if you want to.
Stuart

[Ben Field]

Terry- I am seriously concerned about your club if that situation is allowed to happen- any AD (instructor qualified or not) should be capable of training? They have to by their very nature of being beyond DL- leading a less experience diver IS training.

No AD in our club get a minute to sit on their qualification- its their duty to be one step ahead in every field, to be bang up to date on O2 admin, first aid and whatever speacialities they possess.

The new OWI (quick instructor course) doesn't make you an instructor, doing one lecture, one pool lesson and a test you your suddenly an Instructor... thats like saying the Driving test teaches you to drive?

It Qualifys you to teach- doesn't mean you are capable of being a good instructor.

Have you ever "overheard" an instructor briefing at Stoney, seriously alot of people are criminally negligent- I kid you not, and these are so called experience instructors.

BEN

Your 500 Dive AD/ACI has the experience, but that doesnt make
him an Instructor or even a good diver (for that matter).

Agreed but I don't know where you get your AD's from, if they aren't good divers your DO needs to tear a strip off them right NOW!

&gt; has done his ADI, then OWIC, TIE & PIE and been
&gt; assessed as an Instructor.

Hmmm, and that is sufficent to train and test his full instructing capabilities for your proposed training of immature children? Even some experienced secondary teachers are driven to distraction by 12yr old- what makes you think a 19yr old (and I dare anyone to tell me a 19yr is fully mature- I know I was one!) is capable of excellent training (and it will have to be) for there level of learning skills?

The assumption that just because somebody has shedloads of
dives they are good Instructors just isnt true.

Agreed, but I didn't want to over emphasis something i percieve as obvious- see my comments above about sub-standard AD's.

BEN

[Adrian Kelland]

Terry- I am seriously concerned about your club if that situation is allowed to happen- any AD (instructor qualified or not) should be capable of training? They have to by their very nature of being beyond DL- leading a less experience diver IS training.

It should be practice of skills they have been previously taught. It is a big leap of faith to assume that a very good diver is even a mediocre intructor.

No AD in our club get a minute to sit on their qualification- its their duty to be one step ahead in every field, to be bang up to date on O2 admin, first aid and whatever speacialities they possess.

Never seen that duty written up anywhere, but fair enough.

The new OWI (quick instructor course) doesn't make you an instructor, doing one lecture, one pool lesson and a test you your suddenly an Instructor... thats like saying the Driving test teaches you to drive?

Yet you seem to be accepting that being an AD does make you an instructor in your first statement.

It Qualifys you to teach- doesn't mean you are capable of being a good instructor.

Then an AD with an instructor course must be better?

Have you ever "overheard" an instructor briefing at Stoney, seriously alot of people are criminally negligent- I kid you not, and these are so called experience instructors.

BEN

:=Your 500 Dive AD/ACI has the experience, but that doesnt make
:=him an Instructor or even a good diver (for that matter).

Agreed but I don't know where you get your AD's from, if they aren't good divers your DO needs to tear a strip off them right NOW!

Who says Terry's ADs are not good divers? If you can cite criminally negligent intructors, then likely you can cite criminally negligent ADs too.

&gt; has done his ADI, then OWIC, TIE & PIE and been
&gt; assessed as an Instructor.

Hmmm, and that is sufficent to train and test his full instructing capabilities for your proposed training of immature children? Even some experienced secondary teachers are driven to distraction by 12yr old- what makes you think a 19yr old (and I dare anyone to tell me a 19yr is fully mature- I know I was one!) is capable of excellent training (and it will have to be) for there level of learning skills?

Yet you appear happy to let an AD with less instructor training to do the same. The suggestion that any instructor may have to do an additional 'youth training' element has already been made above (or below on theis damn thread centric forum).

:=The assumption that just because somebody has shedloads of
:=dives they are good Instructors just isnt true.

Agreed, but I didn't want to over emphasis something i percieve as obvious- see my comments above about sub-standard AD's.

BEN

Adrian

[Adrian Kelland]

[Ben Field]

&gt; Never seen that duty written up anywhere, but fair enough.

It might not be but if you get to DL let alone AD you have a duty to know what your talking about- perhaps in branches that rarely train its lets slip but I'm in an active training club. We have few AD's who aren't OWI's and all of them could be/should be.

&gt; Yet you seem to be accepting that being an AD does make you
&gt; an instructor in your first statement.

True- but who is more qualified to teach you to change a wheel on your car?
A- A University lecturer training Teachers whos done it once.
or
B- A Kwik-fit-fitter who doesn't know how to teach but changes 100 wheels a day?

You can debate this all day but sticking lots of extra requirements on who can/can't teach younger divers because of their age is IMO a very good reason NOT to teach them to dive at all. They are obviously not ready- neither it seems is the BSAC.

&gt; Who says Terry's ADs are not good divers?

No one, I'm sure their all lovely....
Question- Who said Terry had a harem of Ad's in tow anyway? :-)

&gt; If you can cite criminally negligent intructors, then likely &gt; you can cite criminally negligent ADs too.

Yes but only the instructors instruct and anyone else should be given some pointed advice from their DO- that is one of his/her functions afterall.

&gt; Yet you appear happy to let an AD with less instructor
&gt; training to do the same.

But they are an instructor... once an instructor you can instruct, Yes/no?
Putting multiple extra layers of regulation to "protect" a sub-set of trainees meerly increases my doubt as to should we train them?

&gt; The suggestion that any instructor may have to do an
&gt; additional 'youth training' element has already been made
&gt; above (or below on theis damn thread centric forum).

Yes I agree, the forum Format falls apart with too many replies.

Adding extra training courses... oh great, another way to print money? So now everyone that slaved to get CI/OWI when the ladder was moved again has to spurge yet more of their own cash so a few overzealous parents can get little jimmy to dive?

Is the extra cost, risk, time and hassle dealing with children worth the % membership increase BSAC hope to gain?

Just asking the questions....

BEN

[janos]

Is the extra cost, risk, time and hassle dealing with children worth the % membership increase BSAC hope to gain?

Just asking the questions....

IMHO yes. I think there are relatively few branches that want to train children. If they want to take the responsibility that entails, then I'm sure that they will be prepared to do the work required. And good luck to them. I have every respect for them.

I would have concerns about anyone who was prepared to teach 12 year olds but wasn't prepared to spend a day learning what the differences were.

Laters,
Janos

[janos]

[alison boler]

True- but who is more qualified to teach you to change a wheel on your car?
A- A University lecturer training Teachers whos done it once.
or
B- A Kwik-fit-fitter who doesn't know how to teach but changes 100 wheels a day?

This is a false analogy, if you don't mind me saying so and one that - if followed - would have the BSAC still back in the dark days before Club Instructors were invented. If you said "who would you rather have change the wheel on your car" then I would agree with you.

But in this discussion you should be comparing who you would rather have teach you to fly: someone who was a qualified pilot and flew every day or someone who was a qualified flying instructor and taught people to fly every day.
I have taught many people to dive and quite a few to become diving instructors. It is by no means the case that the best divers (most skilled) necessarily make the best instructors. Very often people have personal skills in diving but lack instructional or communication skills to pass their knowledge on. To use your mechanics comparison, there are plenty of people who are mechanics but that doesn't mean they could teach me to become one.
=
You can debate this all day but sticking lots of extra requirements on who can/can't teach younger divers because of their age is IMO a very good reason NOT to teach them to dive at all. They are obviously not ready- neither it seems is the BSAC.

I don't think there's anything "obvious" about it at all. In fact, I would say that OBVIOUSLY the reverse is true because there are so many, thousands in fact, who are now diving.

Adding extra training courses... oh great, another way to print money? So now everyone that slaved to get CI/OWI when the ladder was moved again has to spurge yet more of their own cash so a few overzealous parents can get little jimmy to dive?

If that was what it came to, then no one would be forced to take the course because no one is being forced to teach minors to dive. Did you make this much fuss about Diving for the Disabled? Instructors who want to teach disabled people to dive have a course to help them do so - no one HAS to do it. If people want to do something, enjoy doing something, then they generally don't mind finding out the best way to do it.


Is the extra cost, risk, time and hassle dealing with children worth the % membership increase BSAC hope to gain?

Firstly, the BSAC are not doing this for a % membership gain, are they? They are looking at this question because Thameside branch have asked them to, on behalf of other branches and many individuals who want to open diving membership within the branches to 12+ year olds. Not sure what the extra costs and risk are over our current situation with 14 year olds, but as to time and hassle.... If a branch or an individual wants to teach young people, then they would answer yes to your question. If they don't then the answer is no.
But these are questions branches and instructors ask themselves all the time aren't they? Some branches don't even train anyone because they don't want the hassle. Fair enough - their choice. But they don't foist their choice on other branches, they don't say: "we think it's too risky and too much hassle to train people personally. And because we don't want to, no other branch can train people either. Goodness me, if one of these branch trainees were to have an accident they would sue the BSAC - better leave it to the Schools."

The reason that I believe that open water training for minors should be carried out by a minimum of an OWI is one of safety and control. Teaching divers in a pool and keeping them in safe control is one thing. When you move out into open water, it is an entirely different situation, moving water, lower viz, distractions etc. An OWI has been trained to plan for such an environment and in methods of keeping students under safe control. A Dive Leader or an AD has not been taught these skills. They have been taught to lead already qualified divers in open water. There is all the difference in the world between these activities. If there wasn't no one would ever fail a PIE, and many people do (and they're all at least DLs).

I make no secret of the fact that I look for the day when all o/w instruction is by qualified OWIs. But that's another story.
Allie

[Andy Nye]

:=True- but who is more qualified to teach you to change a wheel on your car?
:=A- A University lecturer training Teachers whos done it once.
:=or
:=B- A Kwik-fit-fitter who doesn't know how to teach but changes 100 wheels a day?

But in this discussion you should be comparing who you would rather have teach you to fly: someone who was a qualified pilot and flew every day or someone who was a qualified flying instructor and taught people to fly every day.

Allie.

I can see very well what your saying and implying from the above example.
now , if you can see this from my way of thinking .using the lecturer V quik fit fitter.

A University lecturer training the students how to do it in a break down fashion . little steps ( like bsac teaching ).

Get jack out the boot.
Place jack under the car.
Chock off a wheel.
Loosen off flat type wheel nuts.
Jack up car slowly.
Stop jacking.
Take nuts fully off threads.
Lift off deflated tyre.
Place defleted tyre on the ground.
Pick up new tyre.
Align and sldie onto hub and threads.
Screw back on nuts to finger tight.
Screw down the jack to place all 4 tyres on the ground.
Tighten up nuts tight.
place jack back in the boot.


Now this is roughly how it is broken down, by the lecturer teaching his students,, he knows this procedure very well and has performed it many times parrot fashioned, and hoping the students learn by his example.

Now. what if

Get jack out the boot.
Place jack under the car.
Chock off a wheel.
Loosen off flat type wheel nuts.
3 come loose.
forth nut has been cross threaded and jammed on.

No more lesson ,,, endex as the poor lecturer, doesn't / not trained / no knowledge / no tools /no tricks of the trade. to bail him out....

ya can't get better than a quik fit fitter 8-)




Andy

[Stuart Hayes]

Andy
I reality the lecturer would take his car to Kwik Fit and let the mechanic do it.
I think it boils down to the fact some TALK about it some DO it!

[Stuart Hayes]

SORRY couldnt resist that one!! NO OFFENCE MENT!

[Ben Field]

&gt; I don't think there's anything "obvious" about it at all. In &gt; fact, I would say that OBVIOUSLY the reverse is true because &gt; there are so many, thousands in fact, who are now diving.

Just because other people do something doesn't mean we should follow... and those that are already doing this HAVE put extra conditions on younger people diving so they believe that younger divers should restricted. "Obviously" they consider younger divers- less able or less trainable or less physical ready.

It seems to me the most Obvious thing about this is that training people less than 16-18, (let alone 12-14yr olds) is fraught with extra regulation, extra training for instructors, extra risk for BSAC and as we are not "apparently" doing it to increase or maintain membership level (contary to whats been said elsewhere on here) I fail to see why we are expending so much effort on pushing it?

We are only hearing that it adds layers of extra training and paperwork, I haven't seen any mails extolling a great list of benefits this will bring.

&gt; Did you make this much fuss about Diving for the Disabled?

Since when was "you" an exceptable word to use on a public discussion forum?

&gt; Instructors who want to teach disabled people to dive have a &gt; course to help them do so - no one HAS to do it. If people
&gt; want to do something, enjoy doing something, then they
&gt; generally don't mind finding out the best way to do it.

Agreed but the amount of interest the average club with a training scheme and public presence get from disabled divers is surely miniscule compared the potential demand for training of younger divers.

I don't think we can compare a disability to youth, if we do are then I think we just shot the 12yr old issue down in flames!

&gt; They are looking at this question because Thameside branch
&gt; have asked them to, on behalf of other branches and many
&gt; individuals who want to open diving membership within the
&gt; branches to 12+ year olds.

So in what way is that not simply another way of getting the same idea thats failed twice before to the committee?

One of the standard threats is that we will loose members who wish to train 12yr olds- isn't that a membership issue?

&gt; Not sure what the extra costs and risk are over our current
&gt; situation with 14 year olds,

So this extra training, branch checking and paperwork is all to be done for free and is not a % increase on the membership fee and an addition cost to clubs and members wishing to train under 14/12's?

&gt; But they don't foist their choice on other branches, they
&gt; don't say: "we think it's too risky and too much hassle to
&gt; train people personally. And because we don't want to, no
&gt; other branch can train people either. Goodness me, if one of &gt; these branch trainees were to have an accident they would sue &gt; the BSAC - better leave it to the Schools."

Yes but while its completely off topic there is nothing to stop them from raising it as a motion for council should someone feel that way inclined!!!

Once a choice has been made by the BSAC then there will be a pressure on clubs with higher age limits from within those branches and perhaps externally if they are having membership issues as a branch to go into something their members aren't really happy with just to keep their numbers and club intact.

&gt; An OWI has been trained to plan for such an environment and
&gt; in methods of keeping students under safe control. A Dive
&gt; Leader or an AD has not been taught these skills. They have &gt; been taught to lead already qualified divers in open water.

Suddenly I am less concerned about children diving and more concerned about ever diving with so called AD's... Goodness me- if you can qualify as an AD without those abilities then my qualifications are worthless.
:)

&gt; There is all the difference in the world between these
&gt; activities. If there wasn't no one would ever fail a PIE,
&gt; and many people do (and they're all at least DLs).

I was under the impression that they shouldn't be taking a Practical Instruction exam without having been trained by there branch to teach first? What is wrong with some branches? don't they support and encourage their members at ALL?

&gt; I make no secret of the fact that I look for the day when all &gt; o/w instruction is by qualified OWIs. But that's another
&gt; story.

To gain my AD I had to do PRM and DPM etc and in that process met many OWI's and above... I would only have guessed that 30-40% where qualified above ACI if I hadn't been told otherwise.

The current situation seems to be that there are 100's if not 1000's of people sitting at ACI as they do not need to go higher and 100's or more OWI's how really have no right being where they are either.

I can understand the idea of OWI only in open water training but if that is to be the case becoming and staying an OWI has to be worthwhile, and examined properly, even regularly?

It all looks lovely on paper but do the council really now how shockingly bad some of the dive practice of "their" OWI's, ACI's and even Regional coaching staff is?

And these people are to teach children?

Well at least no one will be able to acuse BSAC of not being brave!

[Ben Field]

Sorry, wasn't trying to advertise there guys ;)

[TerryH]

Question- Who said Terry had a harem of Ad's in tow anyway?

Almost ........

Ben. You seem to think that experience alone + an advanced
ticket = the abilty to teach.

Heres a simple solution to the argument.
If your AD is that good, then the exam will be a doddle.

I can honestly say that it is that simple, because every one
of our AD's is an NQI!

TerryH

[will swift]

:=Well they've been raised in the past if not in this particular thread. They are still all valid points.
:=There needs to be a framework in place to protect the branch/DO/instructor who wants to say no to accepting a child for training.
:=As Mike Halligan has stated, some parents can be pushy to the extreme in that they even try to influence the training, which is the other end of the stick that you have experienced with parents potentially leaving their children with you, using the branch as a creche.
:=In a lot of respects the idea of a Junior BSAC status for branches would ensure that they are fully prepared for these eventualities, with all people concerned being aware and qualified to say no or yes to any prospective minor wishing to learn to dive.

The frame work is already in place to say no.If passed as an instructor you still have the right to say no to teaching juniors. The request to lower the age for scuba is for the people/clubs that want to teach juniors.Nobody is saying that we all have to teach juniors. Some clubs may wish to teach juniors others may not.That descision is down to each and every individual/club to decide if they want to or not.
As an Instructor you go away for a weekend training first day no problem, at the night you have one to many beers,come the second day you do not feel like diving/instructing. You have the right to say NO to doing it. The same applies to teaching juniors. You only have to do it if you want to.
Stuart

I see the above discussion being more about those saying 'yes' than those saying 'no'. Providing a safe environment for both the junior and the instructor in the club environment is paramount, as schools work under a different legislative framework to clubs they have that currently in place, opening the club structure to younger members without additional safeguards seems to be the hurdle for the yes camp. I'm in the no camp.

[alison boler]

Ben

We are only hearing that it adds layers of extra training and paperwork, I haven't seen any mails extolling a great list of benefits this will bring.

There have been many posts - even websites :) - about that aspect. I thought this thread was supposed to be about what general limits we would like to see in place - if any.

:=&gt; Did you make this much fuss about Diving for the Disabled?

Since when was "you" an exceptable word to use on a public discussion forum?

Well, Ben, "you" use it all the time in your posts? We are discussing our personal opinions here, aren;t we?

Agreed but the amount of interest the average club with a training scheme and public presence get from disabled divers is surely miniscule compared the potential demand for training of younger divers.

Exactly. There are lots of families and kids who are being disadvantaged - pushed elsewhere - at the moment, for no good reason.
Having said that, there are clubs who advertise their services for disabled divers and they get a lot of interest - they seek it. Other clubs do not and have made the decision that they would not accept disabled members. Their choice. They have made a decision about the make-up of their branch. A branch that offers training to the under 18s would be just the same.

I don't think we can compare a disability to youth, if we do are then I think we just shot the 12yr old issue down in flames!

I disagree. When the BSAC decided - quite rightly - to enable scuba diving for disabled people, they were trying to widen the availability of the sport to a group of people who currently were excluded. Council looked at a way that it could be done as safely as possible. Just like now. The BSAC - as GB - ought to be about enabling people to learn to dive.

&gt; They are looking at this question because Thameside branch
&gt; have asked them to, on behalf of other branches and many
&gt; individuals who want to open diving membership within the
&gt; branches to 12+ year olds.

So in what way is that not simply another way of getting the same idea thats failed twice before to the committee?

Actually it has always received a majority vote in favour of the motion.

So this extra training, branch checking and paperwork is all to be done for free and is not a % increase on the membership fee and an addition cost to clubs and members wishing to train
under 14/12's?

Whoah! Slow down. Firstly, there hasn't even been a vote yet. Council haven't made any decisions or recommendations. All we're doing here - in this forum - is saying what we think. Not what will be. And any extra training would just be for those that want it. To use the Disabled Diver analogy again, there is extra training and paperwork there but those who are involved in it don't find it ott and I would hazard a guess that people who are not involved in it have no idea of exactly what is involved.

Once a choice has been made by the BSAC then there will be a pressure on clubs with higher age limits from within those branches and perhaps externally if they are having membership issues as a branch to go into something their members aren't really happy with just to keep their numbers and club intact.

Don't agree. It doesn't happen now with the 14 - 18s, why would it happen all of a sudden with the 12 - 13s.?? Many branches are currently very happily adults only.

Suddenly I am less concerned about children diving and more concerned about ever diving with so called AD's... Goodness me- if you can qualify as an AD without those abilities then my qualifications are worthless.
:)
When you qualify as an AD you qualify as a diver with advanced skills. No part of that qualification or the training for that qualification covers instructing other divers. I can drive but I'm not a qualified driving instructor. Doesn't devalue my driving abilities, just my proven ability to teach someone else to drive.

&gt; There is all the difference in the world between these
&gt; activities. If there wasn't no one would ever fail a PIE,
&gt; and many people do (and they're all at least DLs).

I was under the impression that they shouldn't be taking a Practical Instruction exam without having been trained by there branch to teach first? What is wrong with some branches? don't they support and encourage their members at ALL?

Some branches don't have anyone to "mentor" their budding instructors, maybe the budding instructor is the only one in the branch. Maybe he or she is the only one who has gone this far. Who is going to train them to be an OWI if there isn't one already in the branch? Maybe it's the AD who has never done the course themselves.... ;)

I can't really comment on the rest of your statements about OWIs who "don't deserve their qualifications" and the bad dive practice of "even Regional Coaching Staff". Honestly, if you have observed bad or dangerous practice on teaching events then you should report it to the BSAC who can help those involved.

Allie

[Andy Wade]

:=Well they've been raised in the past if not in this particular thread. They are still all valid points.
:=There needs to be a framework in place to protect the branch/DO/instructor who wants to say no to accepting a child for training.
:=As Mike Halligan has stated, some parents can be pushy to the extreme in that they even try to influence the training, which is the other end of the stick that you have experienced with parents potentially leaving their children with you, using the branch as a creche.
:=In a lot of respects the idea of a Junior BSAC status for branches would ensure that they are fully prepared for these eventualities, with all people concerned being aware and qualified to say no or yes to any prospective minor wishing to learn to dive.

The frame work is already in place to say no.If passed as an instructor you still have the right to say no to teaching juniors. The request to lower the age for scuba is for the people/clubs that want to teach juniors.Nobody is saying that we all have to teach juniors. Some clubs may wish to teach juniors others may not.That descision is down to each and every individual/club to decide if they want to or not.
As an Instructor you go away for a weekend training first day no problem, at the night you have one to many beers,come the second day you do not feel like diving/instructing. You have the right to say NO to doing it. The same applies to teaching juniors. You only have to do it if you want to.


Well, that may be true in principle, but to an instructor who feels pressurised by their DO or parents, may feel they have to go ahead and teach someone who they'd rather not. I wonder just how supportive the system is.
If all instructors who teach minors have to attend a course to familiarise them with the in and outs of teaching minors, thay would have made a statement that they are 'qualified and available' as an instructor who wants to teach minors, anyone who doesn't wish to get involved just has to not take the course.
Don't get me wrong, I agree in principle with what you're saying, I just like to see the i's dotted and t's crossed.
I like the idea of a specific course for interested instructors because this subject is a minefield of potential problems, especially if something goes wrong. You only have to read the extent and variety of differing opinions, and points to consider in these threads to see that.

.

[Andy Wade]

[Nigel Hewitt]

Not that I'm predicting anything....

[Stuart Hayes]

:=
:=The frame work is already in place to say no.If passed as an instructor you still have the right to say no to teaching juniors. The request to lower the age for scuba is for the people/clubs that want to teach juniors.Nobody is saying that we all have to teach juniors. Some clubs may wish to teach juniors others may not.That descision is down to each and every individual/club to decide if they want to or not.
:= As an Instructor you go away for a weekend training first day no problem, at the night you have one to many beers,come the second day you do not feel like diving/instructing. You have the right to say NO to doing it. The same applies to teaching juniors. You only have to do it if you want to.


Well, that may be true in principle, but to an instructor who feels pressurised by their DO or parents, may feel they have to go ahead and teach someone who they'd rather not. I wonder just how supportive the system is.
If all instructors who teach minors have to attend a course to familiarise them with the in and outs of teaching minors, thay would have made a statement that they are 'qualified and available' as an instructor who wants to teach minors, anyone who doesn't wish to get involved just has to not take the course.
Don't get me wrong, I agree in principle with what you're saying, I just like to see the i's dotted and t's crossed.
I like the idea of a specific course for interested instructors because this subject is a minefield of potential problems, especially if something goes wrong. You only have to read the extent and variety of differing opinions, and points to consider in these threads to see that.

Valid point! Personaly i feel as an instructor we should know better than to bow to peer pressure. Its what we keep telling our students. I also agree with the point raised by Mike regarding pushy parents. What if there was a regiser for those instructors that WANTED to teach juniors.Yes and atleast an awareness course on the added requirements in teaching juniors.
Stuart

[neil r]

Sorry folks typo , , but you all got the gist of what i was meaning and the discutions on this thread , has been very constructive which is what i'd hoped for .

Neil R

[Adrian Kelland]

Sorry folks typo , , but you all got the gist of what i was meaning and the discutions on this thread , has been very constructive which is what i'd hoped for .

Neil R

No problem at all Neil. It lightened the thread a little :-)

And as you say, thrown up a few ideas.

Adrian

[Bill Bird]

From a purely personal perspective our branch made a concious decision at an AGM that we would not accept un-attached 14 - 18 year olds, although where the individual has been close to 18th birthday we've relented slightly. Those under 18 have to either join with the parent (who therefore takes responsibility for them) or their parent is already a member of the branch. We ostensibly wish to remain an adult branch.

If the decision was made at our AGM to lower the age limit to 12 and allow un-attached under 18's to join our branch I would certainly opt not to train them. I'll stick with the adults! This is purely a personal persepective and choice.

[Ben Field]

&gt; Ben. You seem to think that experience alone + an advanced
&gt; ticket = the abilty to teach.

I said experience + high qualifications + basic teaching ticket should IMVVHO make as good if not better instructors than low qualification + limited experience + CI/OWI/NI whatever.

&gt; I can honestly say that it is that simple, because every one
&gt; of our AD's is an NQI!

Lucky you! :)

[Ben Field]

&gt; Well, Ben, "you" use it all the time in your posts? We are
&gt; discussing our personal opinions here, aren;t we?

I say "we" alot...

&gt; Exactly. There are lots of families and kids who are being
&gt; disadvantaged - pushed elsewhere - at the moment, for no good &gt; reason.

So we're simly moving the disadvantage point down to 11 to gain membership? Its utterly undeniable.

&gt; Actually it has always received a majority vote in favour of &gt; the motion.

Statistics.... it failed on the % therefore it failed, twice.

This is in every way a third attempt but from another angle, I don't think anyone minds that, so long as we're all honest that that's what this is?

&gt; Whoah! Slow down. Firstly, there hasn't even been a vote
&gt; yet. Council haven't made any decisions or recommendations.

This whole thread is as was rightly pointed out- "a what if" discussion about limits, limits led to training and paperwork, I'm just suggesting that might cost money.

&gt; Don't agree. It doesn't happen now with the 14 - 18s, why
&gt; would it happen all of a sudden with the 12 - 13s.?? Many
&gt; branches are currently very happily adults only.

Oh it doesn't does it, Have we checked every single branches oppinion on that?
IME it happens now and it will continue to happen.

&gt; Who is going to train them to be an OWI if there isn't one
&gt; already in the branch? Maybe it's the AD who has never done &gt; the course themselves.... ;)

That is plain silly, we all know we can only train people on things we've already done!

I was hinting that BSAC shouldn't except people for Instructor exams before receiving instructor training thats all.

&gt; Honestly, if you have observed bad or dangerous practice on
&gt; teaching events then you should report it to the BSAC who can &gt; help those involved.

No, I've either spoken to them directly or don't know who they are.
If anyone on here can deny seeing qualified BSAC instructors doing any of the following at your local inland site I'd be amazed because I've seen them all-

Smoking while carrying O2 kit.
Taking trainees well beyond their depth limit.
Allowing trainees to dive without briefing.
Diving with trainees without buddy check.
Diving with trainees who've lost tanks, fins, masks even regs and not noticed...
Sitting in the car park between dives with a splif on the go! (I kid you not)
Exiting the water with a group of trainees to find one or more missing.
Jumping in with trainees without drysuit done up :)
Getting trainee stuck in underwater "attraction" and swimming off, leaving others not part of their club to rescue them.

Not occasionally... ever time I go to Stoney, gildy, Horsea, Chepstow, Wraysbury etc...

And with a short course these people could be teaching your children?


This thread is about limiting the diving of 12-16yr olds under potential new guidelines if this motion is passed. Everyone on here is almost undoubtlable highly trained or training and very alert instructors or divers... putting regulations in place based on keen BSAC instructors who're likely to discuss the motion, vote for or against it and even set the regulations themselves is not an option.

There is a considerable lower skill set present within membership through no fault of anyone- its a natural bell curve of talent/skills... I think we all agree teaching kids will be more demanding and require a level of skill- I just think we should be very aware of whom we're talking about when we band box people purely by qualification level.

[gridler]

:=Question- Who said Terry had a harem of Ad's in tow anyway?

Almost ........

Ben. You seem to think that experience alone + an advanced
ticket = the abilty to teach.

Heres a simple solution to the argument.
If your AD is that good, then the exam will be a doddle.

I can honestly say that it is that simple, because every one
of our AD's is an NQI!

TerryH

You seem to have changed your tune it was not so long ago that your saw no point in doing these exams in particular the AI, I find myself in agreement with you on most issues which is a first for me.
My biggst worry is the protection from prosecution towards the instructor both from a abuse and a neglect angle. Nothing I have seem makes me want to vote this through .

Garry

[Adrian Kelland]

My biggst worry is the protection from prosecution towards the instructor both from a abuse and a neglect angle. Nothing I have seem makes me want to vote this through .

Why should you be protected if you have sone something wrong? I do understand your point though.

You could have this problem with an adult too. This is what the procedures are all about. And why some of us think that the instructors should have additional training to teach U18 with additional procedures.

A malicious child or parent will be a problem, but part of the procedures is about not giving them a way of being such (don't be on your own with them etc.). I have a friend (a teacher) who was accused of inappropriate behaviour by a child, it took the child's parents to realise the child was lying. I am aware that it can happen. I do not think fear of this should stop the lowering of age requirement.

I am far more concerned about the potential impact on us all from any percieved lack of HQ monitoring of branches training U18 when a child fatality occurs.

Adrian

[richard2338]

When you qualify as an AD you qualify as a diver with advanced skills. No part of that qualification or the training for that qualification covers instructing other divers.

It may not directly cover instructing other divers, however to suggest there is no link between your diving grade and your ability to teach diving is ridiculous. This is what you appear to be suggesting.
Why else do BSAC insist on NQI's being Dive Leader+???
Maybe, just maybe, one picks up a few little tips on diving safety along the way through the BSAC training programme that just MIGHT be of use as an instructor... like buddy monitoring etc etc etc???!!!

In short:
You can be a good diver and a poor diving instructor, however, you most certainly CANNOT be a poor diver and a good diving instructor.

I think this is the point Ben was making. And we all seem agreed on this thread that young people need good diving instructors.

My personal opinion is that if this motion is passed, BSAC will need new instructor grades for junior diving. First the OWI would need to attend a 'Young Diver Instructor Awareness Course' or call it what you will to become an Asst Junior OWI (JOWI??!). Then an assessment to become a full JOWI.
This grade of instructor should be required for all teaching of those not deemed 'adult'... ie 17 or younger?

Specialist training in awareness of the issues relating to teaching of youngsters ie physical contact problems etc is far more important than a blanket statement saying that only OWI's should be able to teach them.
I am an OWI with quite a few years of dive training experience, however I would be very nervous about training anyone younger than at least 16 to dive, however I'm very sure my friend, who is a Dive Leader/ADI and a primary school teacher, would be an excellent diving instructor for the same young students, just as she is with adult diving students.

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

Don't ask! I have no idea why this moved to Page 2, this message /should/ bump it back again.

K

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

Don't ask! I have no idea why this moved to Page 2, this message /should/ bump it back again.

K

Nope - STILL on Page 2

[Adrian Kelland]

:=Don't ask! I have no idea why this moved to Page 2, this message /should/ bump it back again.
:=
:=K

Nope - STILL on Page 2

Thread length at all Keith?

Perhaps a new front end template to anyboard wouldn't hurt either. ;-) Once a thread goes off the right, it looks terrible.

Adrian

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

Thread length at all Keith?
Perhaps a new front end template to anyboard wouldn't hurt either. ;-) Once a thread goes off the right, it looks terrible.

We're hoping to put a new web server in within the next month or so, this forum software is going, we'll be running on something a bit more modern!

K

[Nigel Hewitt]

We're hoping to put a new web server in within the next month or so, this forum software is going, we'll be running on something a bit more modern!

Oh dear. So the nice threaded system will go for the listed posts style of Deco Stop/Yorkshire divers/etc.? *sigh* Such is progress.

[gridler]

The protection that I refer to is the protection from false accusations and as a detective believe me they happen alot, they can also take a great number of years to manifest themselves. The hard thing here is weighing up the fun aspect for all with the risks and the risks far outweigh the other fun element. Its not about what other agencies do its about what we feel is right, would I let my 12 year old dive yes would I want to instruct 12 year old children no because of the risks. By the way I was not suggesting that thoses who comit offences should be protected they are a very small fration of the people that do good but they have created this situation.

[Adrian Kelland]

:=Thread length at all Keith?
:=Perhaps a new front end template to anyboard wouldn't hurt either. ;-) Once a thread goes off the right, it looks terrible.

We're hoping to put a new web server in within the next month or so, this forum software is going, we'll be running on something a bit more modern!

K

Yay :D

Although I don't fancy the job of conversion. I have not seen a converter to vB or any of the better free forum software.

Adrian

[webmaster]

Hi Keith, and all,

The total screen depth is limited to avoid pages getting so long they never load. This was once a problem but we can probably allow more now. I have increased the allowed number of entries by 25%. Let me know if you would like more.

Mike


Don't ask! I have no idea why this moved to Page 2, this message /should/ bump it back again.

K

[Adrian Kelland]

The protection that I refer to is the protection from false accusations and as a detective believe me they happen alot, they can also take a great number of years to manifest themselves. The hard thing here is weighing up the fun aspect for all with the risks and the risks far outweigh the other fun element. Its not about what other agencies do its about what we feel is right, would I let my 12 year old dive yes would I want to instruct 12 year old children no because of the risks. By the way I was not suggesting that thoses who comit offences should be protected they are a very small fration of the people that do good but they have created this situation.

Agreed, but would you also say you have never been called as a detective to any incidents of 'no accusation'? Most teachers have been accused of nothing at all. Perhaps because they follow procedures regarding never being alone etc. We willhave to do similar if we go down this road.

Is the risk of accusation really so high that you see the risk to yourself as instructor as higher than the risk to your child as student?

Is it still true that the greatest risk is at home?

[gridler]

Moral dilemma! The main issue is protection of the young person not the instructor I agree. You are right with what you say do your own issues take paramount over those of the young person or child, to say I wont do it is I agree to bury your head in the sand however scout leaders and teachers do have additional training, if it happens then surly the instructor should be afforded the right to be trained and be able to identify the risks. You posed a bit of a moral dilemma with that one tricky to say the least.

[Adrian Kelland]

Moral dilemma! The main issue is protection of the young person not the instructor I agree. You are right with what you say do your own issues take paramount over those of the young person or child, to say I wont do it is I agree to bury your head in the sand however scout leaders and teachers do have additional training, if it happens then surly the instructor should be afforded the right to be trained and be able to identify the risks. You posed a bit of a moral dilemma with that one tricky to say the least.

Some of os would like to see any intructors who wish to do this to have that COMPULSORY additional training.

There are some who think you can get away with 'treat them as adults' when it is clear they are not. These are the ones who may well get us all into problems.

Adrian

[Ruth Healey]

:=:=Teaching 'em - not under any circs whatever, unless they're 14 and have a parent in-water (or 16 without that caveat) and even then only under independent observation.
:=:=
:=:=Diving with 'em - 16 and independently supervised.
:=:=
:=:=Marshalling 'em - as above.
:=:=
:=:=It is not that I dislike or mistrust these potential adults, I have very good cause not to trust the adults who inevitably accompany them.
:=:=
:=:=Mike
:=
:=Hi Mike,
:=
:=It?s really down to each branch but in the case of my branch, members of 14 or 15 years of age will only be accepted providing a parent or guardian is a Full Diving Member of the branch and the BSAC. This person must accompany the young member on all branch activities. Members of 16 or 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or guardian on all branch activities. This person need not be a member of the branch or the BSAC
:=
:=From a personal point of view, I don't see why I should take responsibility for other people's kids especially out of the water on a weekends diving trip to Plymouth for example.
:=
:=Cheers..........Allan

All this over lowering the age limit to 12. I have read what people have to say and some points I agree with. Why can't people understand that if/when it is passed it will be down to each individual club to decide if they want to teach scuba to junior members. I wish some of the dinosaurs out there would join the 21st century. I totally agree that members under 14 should be accompanied by a parent and instructor. I will be voting YES to the proposal as I have dived with many junior divers and consider them to be perfectly safe. If there are Instructors out there with reservations or say no point blank,I suggest they look at the way they teach as teaching juniors needs alittle more thought. If juniors are taught correctly and safely from the beginning,I see no reason why anyone should say no to the proposal.

Each branch/individual would have the right to thier personal view and decision as to who they dive with as is the present situation. To lower the age does not effect a divers right to decide who they dive with. Whats the problem?

Ruth

[Ruth Healey]

:= An idea would be for BSAC to speak to the branches that currently have junior members. That mite help to put guidelines into place. Another idea would be for the diving side to talk to the snorkling side to see how they teach juniors 8+. At the end of the day we are one big club, It would be nice to see the wall between the two parties eventualy be taken down.

And (IMHO) this needs to be done before we admit 12 year olds.

Laters,
Janos

[Ruth Healey]

:=:= An idea would be for BSAC to speak to the branches that currently have junior members. That mite help to put guidelines into place. Another idea would be for the diving side to talk to the snorkling side to see how they teach juniors 8+. At the end of the day we are one big club, It would be nice to see the wall between the two parties eventualy be taken down.
:=
:=And (IMHO) this needs to be done before we admit 12 year olds.
:=
:=Laters,
:= Janos

Hear Hear, thank you Janos. yes ask us snorkellers, more than happy to help. Take your point agree with all you say. But we already admit 8 year olds as snorkellers into the ONE BSAC.

Regards
Ruth

[ruth healey]

:=:=:=The key points that need answering is that should the following apply to all minors under 18
:=:=
:=:=&gt;&gt; Just one issue/point with "under 18". My understanding, is that a 16 or 17yr old that has achieved SD can do the IFC and instruct under the supervision of an NQI...
:=:=
:=:=Does that mean you could end up with (exagerating here)... An OD parent/guardian watching over an SD child teaching (anyone of any age) in the pool under the supervision of an NQI...
:=
:=Hmm, interesting point.
:=
:=I can't find anything to say that the 17y/o could not be a DL/OWI instructing a 14y/o. AFAIUI that 17y/o does not require supervision. Yet the 17y/o is still a minor.
:=
:=Another inconsistency - a Snorkel Instructor has to be 18, an OWI has no age requirement.
:=
:= http://www.bsac.org/techserv/tecpuba1.htm
:=
:=I wonder if there is anything in the welfare policy re minor/minor instructor/student pairings?
:=
:=Adrian

Actually, there is an age requirement of 18 to be an OWI

Allan

[TerryH]

You seem to have changed your tune it was not so long ago that your saw no point in doing these exams in particular the AI, I find myself in agreement with you on most issues which is a first for me.

Sorry, not so. Very much see every reason for ALL teaching
to be done by NQI's. That's the old PADI-pro in me coming
out. The bit where only Instructors teach!

So if you want to teach become an OWI. We do instructor
training all the time, with mentoring etc. Even pay for
some to go on TIE & PIE etc. or subsidise a pro one when
the BSAC run ones are not convienient.

Reason for the anti-AI approach is it's relevance.
The grade has been diluted to the point where there is very
little you cant do as an OWI. The stated aim is change the
grade into more of an Instructor trainer event. Fine if you
want to staff IFC's, not much point if you dont.

Not anti exam, just anti the relevance of the AI exam.

TerryH

[TerryH]

I said experience + high qualifications + basic teaching ticket should IMVVHO make as good if not better instructors than low qualification + limited experience + CI/OWI/NI whatever.


So if they are so good, why not do the exam and prove it?
That way there is no question that they can teach.

TerryH

[Khaled Alwassia]

Andy,
I really hope that no-one changes a tire as described in your lecturer example. That would be a disater waiting to happen.

What you ferget is, that a mechanic will allways train you hand-on. In that case the trainee sees, feels and understands the process. When the University lecturer "teaches" his class there is only the see part but no practical application.
So now you guess how i would like to change my tire.

Khaled

Mechanic & Lecturer & OWI