Utah survival school getting sued

[mrostov]

When this first happened a few months ago the story was posted here. This lawsuit is probably going to turn into a fight over just how far a liability release form can protect a school like that.

IMHO, the instructors were negligent in the situation.

************

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEAD_OF_THIRST?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

May 4, 7:11 PM EDT

Dead Hiker's Family Sues Survival School

By ED WHITE
Associated Press Writer

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- The parents of a New Jersey hiker who died of thirst during a survival course sued the school and its guides Friday, claiming negligence in a risky expedition in the hot Utah desert.

Dave Buschow, 29, showed signs of extreme distress but was not offered emergency water by staff during the second day of a 28-day expedition in which 12 campers had few essentials last July. He died of dehydration.

The Associated Press this week detailed how Buschow was desperate and delusional in 100-degree weather long before he collapsed.

Buschow's parents, Patricia Herbert of River Vale, N.J., and Brad Buschow of Tafton, Pa., sued Boulder Outdoor Survival School and four employees, including Shawn O'Neal, the guide who was with Buschow when he dropped less than 100 yards from a pool of water in Garfield County.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Salt Lake City seeks unspecified financial damages.

"He paid to experience wilderness. Instead of learning how to survive on his own, he was made to die," said S. Brook Millard, a lawyer for the family.

The Colorado-based school, known as BOSS, has denied any negligence and instead blamed Buschow, saying the security officer and former Air Force airman did not read course materials, may have withheld health information and may have eaten too heavily before arriving for the grueling course.

A lawyer for the school said Friday he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.

BOSS filed a lawsuit in the same court in January, asking a judge to uphold liability waivers signed by Buschow when he applied for the course. There has been no progress in that case.

"Mr. Buschow expressly assumed the risk of serious injury or death prior to participating," the school's lawsuit said.

 

[xylaria]

"Mr. Buschow expressly assumed the risk of serious injury or death prior to participating," the school's lawsuit said.

If I was on a course like that i would assume the risk of death would come from snake bites,rock fells and environmental hazards, not from instructors either not recognising or caring if I was becoming dehydrated. I have worked in health care and dehydration is easy to spot before it gets life threatening and can't see BOSSs excuse. IMHO their staff were either badly trained or inhumane.

 

[Mike Ameling]

As with all of these "news blurbs", most of the details are left out. So it is very hard to formulate any sort of an informed opinion of what transpired. How many people on this trek? How many guides/instructors? What did the written prep material say? How much one-on-one monitoring was done? What details were left out by the individual, or by the business?

What has been lost in these modern times is Common Sense and Personal Responsibility for one's own actions/decisions. The really alarming part is that it is now expected that everybody else must watch out for you - to protect you from the rest of the world and your own actions. This modern "nanny society" mentality now demands that everybody else create a "padded cell" environment to protect you from any possible injury to yourself - from outside sources or your own self. Why has it become somebody else's responsibility to protect you from the consequences of your own bad decisions?

In the end, anybody can sue anybody else - over anything.

Sorry for my "bad mood" rant. I'm just a tad tired of playing nanny to a bunch of people who should not have survived long enough to reproduce - and the lawyers who prey on and profit off of them.

Mike Ameling - out in the "less forgiving" Hinterlands

 

[bloodline]

surely the guy new the risks? he must have known he needed water, we are responsible for our own lives even if we are on a course.

 

[TobyH]

"What has been lost in these modern times is Common Sense and Personal Responsibility for one's own actions/decisions. The really alarming part is that it is now expected that everybody else must watch out for you - to protect you from the rest of the world and your own actions. This modern "nanny society" mentality now demands that everybody else create a "padded cell" environment to protect you from any possible injury to yourself - from outside sources or your own self. Why has it become somebody else's responsibility to protect you from the consequences of your own bad decisions?

In the end, anybody can sue anybody else - over anything."

I totally agree Mike. Thanks to our libalous society everyone is up for a possible chance to free money (ok I know that may not be the case here, but you know what I mean).

The main point is that if I sign to say I accept responsibilty then that is what I, and my family, should accept!

 

[NatG]

i don't think that it was expressly either party's fault- the participant should have said that he had had enough and needed water, the instructors should have recognised the signs of dehydration and treated him accordingly.

this is definitely not a "free money" scenario, a man signed up on a course with trained experts, supposedly, who ha d a duty of care over him, for his money he was quite right to expect that not only did he experience the outdoors, he was looked after while he was there too.

the school are ultimately negligent, i hope that the family gets a reasonable level of compensation

 

[TobyH]

Nat, I agree with you in this case but as Mike was saying there's far too many people not taking responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Robby]

I have to agree with Toby, that I can see both sides of the argument here. Yes, we are steadily becoming a more and more litigioussociety, and yes, people should accept more responsibility for there own safety. I have to say though that I would like to know more of the facts, as surely,school or not, someone should have been able to show the basic humanity needed to see that the man was dangerously dehydrated and offer him water

 

[Draven]

I agree that people must take responsibilities for their actions.

However, you can't just brush it off by saying "He signed his life into their hands, so it's his fault that their inaction killed him."

Perhaps he should have been more ademant. But they DEFINITELY shouldn't have refused him water.

Hell, I've been refused water on a hike up the pentlands, and that was bad enough. I can't fathom what this guy went through, but IMHO anyone who would refuse to give water to a man who must have been very clearly ill and distressed shouldn't be sued, they should be locked away.

 

[rancid badger]

I'm sorry about what happened to this bloke but how the hell can he die of dehydration on only the second day of an expedition?
obviously we dont have access to full information but you just dont go down that quickly unless there are other, complicating factors.

 

[Draven]

I'm sorry about what happened to this bloke but how the hell can he die of dehydration on only the second day of an expedition?
obviously we dont have access to full information but you just dont go down that quickly unless there are other, complicating factors.

It was in the Utah desert. It gets pretty damn hot. Under normal circumstances, we cannot go approx 3 days without water, but hiking through a hot desert is NOT normal circumstances, so I suppose that those are the complicating factors.

 

[JURA]

We all have a duty of care to our immediate neighbour. Instructors have a HIGHER duty of care of their students due to the nature of their skills and experience. I cant comment about dehydration as such, but i do have experience of monitoring hypothermia in my students. I would generally consider it unacceptable to allow one of my students to become hypothermic no matter how remote my supervision, or how experienced my student. If you accept a student onto a course a prudent leader would establish their level of competence before setting the level of challenge. Everyone has their own threshold. The leaders job is to establish where it is !!

 

[BOD]

We all have a duty of care to our immediate neighbour. Instructors have a HIGHER duty of care of their students due to the nature of their skills and experience.

Sorry but there is no common law duty of care to a stranger or a person on a course with you unless YOU have intervened or acted in a way that gives rise to a duty of care. You are not obliged to do anything and can simply pass by.

You are not obliged to offer your own water.

You may feel a moral duty to help but that is not the same as a legal one

In the case of the instructor there probably is a duty of care however but that will be for the courts to decide. You cannot be found to be in breach of the duty of care unless it has been established first.

 

[JURA]

Sorry but there is no common law duty of care to a stranger or a person on a course with you unless YOU have intervened or acted in a way that gives rise to a duty of care. You are not obliged to do anything and can simply pass by.

You are not obliged to offer your own water.

You may feel a moral duty to help but that is not the same as a legal one

In the case of the instructor there probably is a duty of care however but that will be for the courts to decide. You cannot be found to be in breach of the duty of care unless it has been established first.

your duty of care as a peer on a course is not as well established as a paid leader i accept, but i feel you would be on a tenuous pitch legally not providing water when you could. However, your duty of care as an instructor is already established when you accept a student on your course !!

We can pontificate at length but the reality is that without possesion of ALL the facts of a case im not sure you really achieve much by discussing supposition..

 

[mrostov]

Sorry but there is no common law duty of care to a stranger or a person on a course with you unless YOU have intervened or acted in a way that gives rise to a duty of care. You are not obliged to do anything and can simply pass by.

You are not obliged to offer your own water.

You may feel a moral duty to help but that is not the same as a legal one

In the case of the instructor there probably is a duty of care however but that will be for the courts to decide. You cannot be found to be in breach of the duty of care unless it has been established first.

In the US that can be a variable issue. All of the 50 states have their own set of laws. It's not uncommon for something to be casually legal in one state to be a strictly enforced felony in another state.

For example, in the state of Arizona, it is illegal for any business to deny water to someone who asks for it. Some states have 'good Samaritan' laws requiring you to give assistance to someone in need in an emergency under various circumstances.

The incident in question took place in Utah, and their laws and case precedent may be a tad different. I know that on a survival course in Arizona, if a trained instructor had water and withheld it from a student who then died as a result, there is a possibility that the instructors could even be charged with manslaughter, depending upon circumstances, even if that student did not request water.

 

[Matt Mallery]

The whole idea of carrying nothing but a cup from water hole to water hole is ridiculous. You should always carry at least 2 1 liter bottles and fill them every chance you get. Whoever came up with this idea for the course is a fool.

 

[BOD]

The whole idea of carrying nothing but a cup from water hole to water hole is ridiculous. You should always carry at least 2 1 liter bottles and fill them every chance you get. Whoever came up with this idea for the course is a fool.

I recently read a review by a former participant (who was positive about the course) and he mentioned people being so knackered that others were helping them walk.

It seems that this course is not about survival per se which as you know is pace yourself, conserve your sweat and take cover during the hottest part of the day.

It seems more like pushing yourself as though you wanted to become a Ranger! While this may show you your limits, it is not helpful for survival as you will be worn out much more quickly than if you took things easy. This sort of response to a survival situation is just as likely to get you into more trouble as you overeach yourself.

The problem with "passing" such a course, is that you then reckon you can take on anything