Is risking your own life really fair on others?

Whether it be bushwalking in remote areas, canyoning, Kayaking, or climbing, all outdoor adventure activities carry a degree of risk, and I think most would agree that to participate in them involves assessing the amount of risk, trying to minimise it and deciding for oneself if the risk outweighs the benefits. But what about those we leave behind, is it fair on them?

We've all heard the saying "s/he died doing what they loved". Is this necessarily true, and in those final moments would this be the thought running through your mind?

OK, so it's a gloomy subject, but one I'm sure everyone has an opinion on?

[trickos]

Last weekend, as I was stuggling for air and struggling to surface underneath a wedged canoe in a swollen river, there was only one thought that went through my mind......panic! Lucky for me the old fibreglass canoe split into 2.
I know it goes against everything that we have ever been taught but I think its impulse more than anything. I remember also thinking "this can't be the way I go".
Let me assure you, that night I had a good hard think about the situation I was in and the people who I would leave behind (wife, 2 year old boy and one on the way) and the way I nearly let them down by a silly act of bravado.
Its certainly put a hold on my canoeing career as I've realised that theres a lot of things you can't control on the water - especially when things go wrong and the risk is high.
In hiking however, the participant has a greater control of risk as it all comes down to sound decision making. I'm sure everyone on this forum has a story to tell - but hiking gets in your blood and its something i love to do.....if I die doing it then I did die doing what I loved.

[taswegian]

When I was young I thought like a young'n.
I'd just head off 'To Walls , Mum see you when I get back on Tuesday' stuff. Fit and energetic, knew how to look after myself, often no tent - slept under logs or rock ledges if weather a bit murky.
I often reflect on a 'caving' outing when young kid. We squeezed into this narrow crevice and off into the beyond. It makes me shudder now.

As I aged and kids came along I still went same places (not caves like that thanks) but not on my own. Resposibility set in.
To answer - I'd say NO, its not fair to have to make the response 'he/she died doing what they loved so much'.

Trickos I'm glad you escaped from that aweful predicament. ..the participant has a greater control of risk as it all comes down to sound decision making..
I agree with your comments and these things need to be tempered by such.

I have often reflected on lost lives doing just what they loved when all the time it was what many say is foolhardy. I have felt for the wife, kids, mum and dad left behind.
I guess I am thankful my youthful escapes never found me in a predicament.

[Tony]

Good debate but is bushwalking in remote areas, canyoning, Kayaking, or climbing and other outdoor adventure activities carry any more risk than being in a car on our roads.

Tony

[Chief]

Good debate but is bushwalking in remote areas, canyoning, Kayaking, or climbing and other outdoor adventure activities carry any more risk than being in a car on our roads.

Tony

Good point,i quite often walk to my local shopping centre and i feel more at risk walking on footpath beside the road than being out in the bush.

Hi Tony and Chief

I'm not suggesting that being in a car is more dangerous or not, but that's not quite the point is it?

If it were then I would have asked that very question and most likely done so on the RTA website (or somewhere similar).

Of course there are no end to the alternatives to the activities mentioned, however, I thought that as this site was in fact about these very activities then there's no need to mention every other possibility imaginable.

[Bush Walker]

Content of this post transferred to new thread Is Ultra Lightweight Bushwalking Too risky? by poster

Last edited by Bush Walker on Tue 14 Dec, 2010 3:54 pm, edited 4 times in total.

[ninjapuppet]

Last weekend, as I was stuggling for air and struggling to surface underneath a wedged canoe in a swollen river, there was only one thought that went through my mind......panic! Lucky for me the old fibreglass canoe split into 2.
I know it goes against everything that we have ever been taught but I think its impulse more than anything. I remember also thinking "this can't be the way I go".
Let me assure you, that night I had a good hard think about the situation I was in and the people who I would leave behind (wife, 2 year old boy and one on the way) and the way I nearly let them down by a silly act of bravado.
Its certainly put a hold on my canoeing career as I've realised that theres a lot of things you can't control on the water - especially when things go wrong and the risk is high.
In hiking however, the participant has a greater control of risk as it all comes down to sound decision making. I'm sure everyone on this forum has a story to tell - but hiking gets in your blood and its something i love to do.....if I die doing it then I did die doing what I loved.

At least you lived to tell us more crazy stories of your adventures mate! was anyone with you or did you go solo?
so what exactly happend? the canoe tipped over and got stuck and trapped you underneath?

I got caught in a sieve a few weeks ago too and can honestly say the power of whitewater is easily underestimated by amatures like me.
Getting trapped underwater by a whitewater seive is easily the most scariest experience I've ever encountered. Easily much scarier than skydiving for sure!

had a long talk with the wife about selling the packraft but the sense of adventure pulls me back. She already made me sell my R1 motorbike... and i regreted it so much after.
hmmm the packraft? no way hosay! I'm not falling for it again this time. maybe i'm just selfish

[Lindsay]

Activites like bushwalking, climbing, white water rafting etc. will never be totally risk free. No one can wrap their loved ones in cotton wool and keep them safe at home forever, in fact attempting to do so is psychologically unhealthy. Therefore if you have calculated the risk and prepared accordingly then you can undertake the activity with a clear conscience and your loved ones left at home can rest secure in the knowlege that you will not be taking any foolish chances.

I take all the points mentioned, and that risk management is certainly warrented if we are to participate in dangerous activitites with anything like a 'clear conscience', but I guess my point is: Is it right to indulge oneself in an acitivity that is inherently dangerous knowing that circumstances might well mean that those left behind suffer should anything go wrong?

I suppose in thinking about this I am probably thinking more about the higher risk activities (not that others have no risks) like high altitude mountaineering, or open sea kayaking, where despite the best assessments made, things can, and quite often do go wrong.

For those left behind it is perhaps of little comfort knowing that the decisions made were the best one could make given the situation, and that all attempts to prevent accidents from happening had been taken into consideration. The fact still remains that somewhere, someone isn't coming home, and that dying for something that they 'loved doing' just isn't justification for leaving others to suffer in their wake..........if that makes sense?

I'm not, however defending any particular side, merely interested to know what others think?

[trickos]

At least you lived to tell us more crazy stories of your adventures mate! was anyone with you or did you go solo?
so what exactly happend? the canoe tipped over and got stuck and trapped you underneath?


An absolute underestimation of the power of a fast flowing river...2 amateurs in the boat. I was at the rear and piledrived my mate into the trees in front - canoe capsized and I went under with it. One of the scariest moments of my life. Also one of the scariest for my companion as he was unable to assist being tangled in a tree and all. Eeeek....theres something about drowning that makes my skin crawl.

[Drifting]

No- unreservedly no. There are people who society mandates to deal with accidental deaths. They choose these jobs, but that doesn't mean they shouldd have to deal with people who have intentionally placed themselves in unusually risky positions.

Having said that, I'll still do dumb things. We are selfish creatures.

I agree: We are selfish creatures..........the question is: Is it right to be selfish knowing what it will do to those we leave behind if it all goes pear shaped?

What, therefore, about the right to chose your own destiny?

[ninjapuppet]

i guess if you had a stay at home wife who depended solely on your income, like my wife, its probally more wrong to take these risks, as compared to my friends who are single and live alone.

The issue about your son not having a father, the wife not having the husband around is similar to other family & friends not having you around if you die.
That aspect of you being gone will be the same. Everyone will all miss you, but life goes on in a similar fashion for most people.

But for the dependant wife and kids especially, their lives would be totally ruined big time. your house & mortgaged car might have to be sold, son wont be able to attend that school you planned, and many other financial implications. it would be weighted strongly on how much your family members depend on you to get by day to day. the more they rely on you, then the less fair it really is to take risks.

Supposing we assumed the affected family to be financially and independently secure, would this make it any the more 'right'?

And to shift the argument a tad, what about those who's job it would be to rescue others in life threatening situations? And by 'job', I'm not referring to those paid to do SAR, but the many volunteers who regularly put their own lives at risk in an effort to help others who may have chosen to put themselves in dangerous situations?

[Lindsay]

You may well be hit by a car on the way to work, and your dependants are just as alone as if you were killed in an outdoor activity. So why not live a little, take a few calculated risks and enjoy yourself? There may be a very slim chance you may be killed, or put someone elses life at risk in a rescue effort. However if you are as prepared as you can be for the activity you undertake this is neither selfish nor unfair to others.

I suppose the question still remains: Why isn't it selfish nor unfair to others?

On the face of it, some might say that it is.

Just playing devils advocate.

[Tony]

Hi normclimb,

Hi Tony and Chief

I'm not suggesting that being in a car is more dangerous or not, but that's not quite the point is it?

If it were then I would have asked that very question and most likely done so on the RTA website (or somewhere similar).

Of course there are no end to the alternatives to the activities mentioned, however, I thought that as this site was in fact about these very activities then there's no need to mention every other possibility imaginable.

With due respect, I was just trying to put the dangers if bushwalking in remote areas, canyoning, Kayaking, or climbing and other outdoor adventure activities into perspective and I do consider travelling to the start of my bushwalking etc and back home from a bushwalk etc(with me and most other bushwalkers and other people doing outdoor activities is usually done by car) as part of the bushwalk and I consider this travelling by car as the most dangerous part of my bushwalking.

Tony

Hi Tony

With equal respect, I am not suggesting anything different, but this isn't the point of the question. Sorry if it's not clear.

[Drifting]

i guess if you had a stay at home wife who depended solely on your income, like my wife, its probally more wrong to take these risks, as compared to my friends who are single and live alone.

The issue about your son not having a father, the wife not having the husband around is similar to other family & friends not having you around if you die.
That aspect of you being gone will be the same. Everyone will all miss you, but life goes on in a similar fashion for most people.

But for the dependant wife and kids especially, their lives would be totally ruined big time. your house & mortgaged car might have to be sold, son wont be able to attend that school you planned, and many other financial implications. it would be weighted strongly on how much your family members depend on you to get by day to day. the more they rely on you, then the less fair it really is to take risks.

This is my position. If I'm gone, there's no one to replace me as the family's breadwinner.

But if I was a single, young man again, I'd probably do more dumb things than I did, including that time I went on a hike in the high mountains and forgot my sleeping bag.

It's a highly individual judgment people have to make, but some folks, IMHO, shouldn't risk themselves.

[taswegian]

there's other things at play here- for me.
If you have a 'mate' - a wife in my case of many years and 4 kids to boot then there is an inherent responsibilty that comes with the situation.
But , and this is touching on some tender areas, there's that mateship that cares and doesn't want to cause any undue hurt and at worst that vacant feeling of loss when someone doesn't make it back to the door.
I've been involved in several cases (too many) involving death (murder, road accidents) and I can tell you it leaves a lump in the throat and a pain inside when one looks at the situation and those affected by these 'incidents'. You look at this or that and say to yourself 'she was beuatiful, why did it have to end this way'. These are things you never forget. Never.
I just won't do something now that I know would cause my wife undue worry even if she knew I was competent, capabable, fit etc. To me thats it - no exceptions. If she preferred I didn't do it then I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it for her.
So, yes there are risks we take and as some have rightly pointed out even driving the car could be seen as risky. To me its those things we do on our own in a hostile wilderness that perhaps should be reconsidered in the light of what I have outlined above. I say hostile as the difference can be as little as 15 minutes as the weather changes and becomes the one in charge.
When I headed off into 'The Walls' I would give a rough outline of where I would go, leave a map behind with details, but the wandering bug and the explorer in me whilst sticking to the concept would have 'diversionary sidetracks' to climb this or that. The chances of finding me if something bad happened were far slimmer than if i'd stuck to well outlined tracks and not wandered. Even today with emergency beacons they are fine IF you can set it off.

I've read some of the well meant concerns others have expressed here when others share details of sole efforts in the bush, mountain peaks etc. I welcome those concerns.
So to me its not so much about risks rather ensuring my loved one(s) are not hurt through any stubborness or selfishness on my part.

[Macca81]

My theory:
at work, i am driving for a fair chunk of the day. for even more of the day i am standing or walking in close proximity to traffic. i enjoy my job (not specifically for reason related to the 2 mentioned situations) and i am happy to put myself in the situation presented. however i dont actively seek out the situations, as i dont specifically find them 'fun'.

in my recreational time, i walk, cave, abseil, raft, kayak, climb, 4wd, play hockey. in each of these activities, i am at risk of loosing my life (to greater or lesser degree, depending on each activity). i actively put myself into these situations, because i do specifically find them 'fun'.

now, of the 2 above comparisons between my work and recriational lives, i would actually think that my work life carries i higher risk of injury or death. i also think i would be a bit annoyed should i die while working...
at the end of the day, whether i die at work or at play, im still dead. the impact is the same on those close to me. we can go through the scenarios of 'he should have taken more care' or 'if only he didnt go into that cave that day', but the same could be said of 'if only he had of chucked a sicky...'.
once im dead, im dead. if it is the ambos trying to stop me bleeding out after being hit by a car, or the SES dragging me out of a cave, the end result is still the same.



the only thing that makes what we do risky, is that the consequences of a series of mistakes, can be higher...

[trickos]

Taking in consideration of the amount of risk people put themselves in - It makes me wonder if the old adage still applies.

"when your numbers up....."

[flyfisher]

Trickos, you're right of course, when your time's up, that's it, all over.
You can be as carefull as, then the unforseen happens and.....
Just take care out there but don't be too put off by what might happen, just minimise the risk and come home after, hopefully. There are no strangers on this forum, just friends we haven't met yet so stay alive so we CAN meet.
ff

[photohiker]

There's really two things here:

1) If you're the breadwinner of the family, what can you do to mitigate the risk that you will be incapacitated through some unforeseen event either in your day-to-day or in your leisure activities?

2) Does bushwalking add significant risk to your activities and what can you do to minimise them?

Wrapping an energetic and motivated bushwalker up in cotton wool and preventing them from enjoying their walking is not the answer.

Both questions enjoy the same solution: Preparation.

[north-north-west]

Whether it be bushwalking in remote areas, canyoning, Kayaking, or climbing, all outdoor adventure activities carry a degree of risk, and I think most would agree that to participate in them involves assessing the amount of risk, trying to minimise it and deciding for oneself if the risk outweighs the benefits. But what about those we leave behind, is it fair on them?

We've all heard the saying "s/he died doing what they loved". Is this necessarily true, and in those final moments would this be the thought running through your mind?

We all have to go sometime. Personally, I want to go like Peter Dombrovskis: booted, packed, and heading down the track alone somewhere remote. Preferably later rather than sooner, but usually we don't get to chose.

And how fair is it of those others to try to deny you what you need to be happy and sane?

[Lizzy]

Well I am not the breadwinner but arguably more importantly I am the mother of 2 young boys and I do like my bushwalks. I must say, now that I have kids I take the risk ALOT more seriously but I still want to enjoy the things I love and have my boys seeing mummy do the things she loves and hopefully instilling in them a love of the great outdoors and a knowledge that they can achieve the things they dream.
Recently I visited the SW for a solo walk- I was well prepared with PLB, phone, first aid kit & the knowledge to use it. I think most importantly I had the attitude that I would simply turn back if I became uncomfortable with my situation- I did make this decision when the weather turned a bit feral. If I had not been solo perhaps I would have made a different decision, but then again if I was really concerned I still would have come off the mountains early. Sure something could still have happened but I think as long as you are sensible and don't have the gun-ho attitude of 'finishing at all costs' then these sort of trips can still be contemplated. Arm yourself with the correct preparation- gear, emergency devices, courses such as first aid.
In terms of volunteer rescuers- yep they are putting themselves at risk but most of them probably enjoy it or they wouldn't be doing it (I know I did when I used to do it!). My 2 cents...
Cheers
Lizzy

[Nuts]

Personally, as much as bushwalking may benefit the soul I dont get the 'need'.. If its that bad, I would think there are issues better worked through at home? 'Want', I do get...
It puzzles me, those so concerned with the effect on loved ones must also think of this when they take little ones with them (who arent capable of knowing the choice and risk).

Once read the SAS survival manual, suprisingly the key to a long life does start with the mention of minimising the mundane risks of everyday life. Minimise driving, flying, dont smoke or drink to excess etc....
Without this quickly leading to 'you wouldn't do anything', maybe it points more to the freedom of choice and that what we call fulfilling 'needs' are merely more opportunities to feed wants? This is obviously so still in many countries, hard to contemplate a recreational walk when youv'e worked physically hard all day. Also comes out in the statistic findings of walkers being very much skewed to a more sedate white collar background and the 'first' world. Time again it is shown that those less privileged aren't less happy, lives less fulfilled..

That in mind, I dont really see taking unnecessary risk as anything more than a selfish choice. That's not a bad thing but is what it is (however its packaged). Whether that risk is fair on others is a good question though. Probably so aligned with personal circumstance that I wouldn't see drawn too many conclusions..

As much as I like the bush I cant see a final face plant into scoparia as a nice ending. If i was to pass away doing what I loved it would happen sleeping; clean, dry n cosy at home in bed

[rogo]

Both questions enjoy the same solution: Preparation.


Also life insurance and a well worded will.

[photohiker]

Both questions enjoy the same solution: Preparation.


Also life insurance and a well worded will.

Yes. But those are preparations, not also's