There was a mention of an incident in one of the
recent DAN magazines. It was an older diver
complaining about not being allowed to dive at the
GBR. He was not told about the requirement until the
boat was underway and was not allowed to dive. I
thought he had a valid complaint that the land-based
part of the operation said nothing to him, even though
he was obviously over 65. I don't remember much about
the DAN response, except it mostly took the operator's
side as they largely seem to do.

Can't find it anywhere on DAN's on-line site. Maybe
their web budget all went to paying off Dr. Bennett
(sorry, cheap shot!) :)

Cheers,
David H.

--- Krazy Kiwi Viv <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 David Strike wrote:
>
> <snip of the kiwi shears>
> >In any event (and I'll ask them tomorrow) at a
> purely personal level,
> >why should anyone who contemplates diving feel that
> a diving  medical
> >is an "evil"?
> >Strike
>
> One of the dive party for the Peter Hughes
> liveaboard trip I was on out of
> Walindi, PNG was required to provide a current
> medical.  He was though in
> his early 70s and had answered Yes to a couple of
> the questions on the
> Diving Release and Waiver.  He, being a doctor
> himself, has an annual
> checkup anyhow so it was no hardship to bring along
> that piece of paper.
> It was also highly recommended that all divers took
> up DAN insurance,
> which the majority of us had anyhow.
>
> We never use to be such a litigious society ;-)
> Viv


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/