Forcible rescue by the RNLI.

[AndrewB]

On yesterday evening's TV show "Saving Lives At Sea", the RNLI rescued a man forcibly from a dinghy sailing dangerously far offshore. I am surprised they have the authority to do this. Shouldn't they have respected his wish not to be rescued?

In the event they did not achieve much since he set off again a few days later (and again was 'rescued').

There are reminders here of the 'Satori' incident in the USA many years ago (featured in the film "Perfect Storm") when the US Coastguard forcibly rescued an experienced yachtsman against his wishes. A coastguard died in the operation. Subsequently it appeared (in real life rather than the film) that the rescue was quite probably unnecessary.

 

[awol]

So, they leave him out there and he perishes? The RNLI are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Publicising it in a sensationalist entertainment programme is probably not the best idea, though.

 

[Giblets]

I seem to recall an incident in the Lee-on-Solent area a while back where a person was bent on walking to the IoW. She refused to be bought into the ILB and a police officer was taken out to her to use his powers to allow the crew to forcibly get her into the boat.

 

[Mark-1]

So, they leave him out there and he perishes? The RNLI are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Can you point to an example of the RNLI being 'dammed' for failing to rescue someone out sailing who doesn't want to be rescued?

I'm not saying the RNLI were wrong in this case (I don't know the detail) but I think it's a stretch to say they would have been critisized for failing to 'rescue' someone who hasn't requested help and doesn't want help.

 

[[3889]]

As I understand it it is the coastguard who can authorise any vessel to impose assistance on a casualty. The only instance I have heard of was a elderly man sailing to the UK from Belgium(?) who was reported overdue by his wife. He was in no difficulty other than delayed by light winds but he was forcibly towed in by the RNLI acting on HMC orders.

 

[bedouin]

I must admit I have given up watching this series as it is a bit cringeworthy at times. One or two very impressive rescues interspersed with a lot of over dramatic stuff about rescuing dogs and the like. I can't help wondering if there is a bit of acting up for the cameras in such situations.

 

[bedouin]

As I understand it it is the coastguard who can authorise any vessel to impose assistance on a casualty. The only instance I have heard of was a elderly man sailing to the UK from Belgium(?) who was reported overdue by his wife. He was in no difficulty other than delayed by light winds but he was forcibly towed in by the RNLI acting on HMC orders.

There was another incident that was discussed on this forum about a decade ago. IIRC it was someone sailing across the North Sea who was forced to take a tow using rules that related to "hazard to shipping" or "polution control" which allowed the authorities to intervene.

 

[Tranona]

On yesterday evening's TV show "Saving Lives At Sea", the RNLI rescued a man forcibly from a dinghy sailing dangerously far offshore. I am surprised they have the authority to do this. Shouldn't they have respected his wish not to be rescued?

In the event they did not achieve much since he set off again a few days later (and again was 'rescued').

There are reminders here of the 'Satori' incident in the USA many years ago (featured in the film "Perfect Storm") when the US Coastguard forcibly rescued an experienced yachtsman against his wishes. A coastguard died in the operation. Subsequently it appeared (in real life rather than the film) that the rescue was quite probably unnecessary.

They made it quite clear that they do not have any authority to force somebody to do anything. So they act according to their conscience as individuals. The person was not in a fit state to do anything and was persuaded eventually to leave his boat and then passed out.

Would you leave a person like that, knowing he would almost certainly die?

It is no different from an individual trying to persuade somebody not to jump off a roof - "authority" does not come into it.

 

[[3889]]

There was another incident that was discussed on this forum about a decade ago. IIRC it was someone sailing across the North Sea who was forced to take a tow using rules that related to "hazard to shipping" or "polution control" which allowed the authorities to intervene.

That may well be the same incident. I can't recall the exact details.

 

[awol]

Can you point to an example of the RNLI being 'dammed' for failing to rescue someone out sailing who doesn't want to be rescued?

I'm not saying the RNLI were wrong in this case (I don't know the detail) but I think it's a stretch to say they would have been critisized for failing to 'rescue' someone who hasn't requested help and doesn't want help.

If http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...dorset-to-america-in-14ft-dinghy-9675985.html is a description of the incident - I didn't watch the programme - then letting the nutter continue might have raised criticism if his body had ever been found.

 

[bedouin]

If http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...dorset-to-america-in-14ft-dinghy-9675985.html is a description of the incident - I didn't watch the programme - then letting the nutter continue might have raised criticism if his body had ever been found.

I imagine the police would have powers to detain him under the mental health act but not sure if those powers can be delegated by VHF

 

[Mark-1]

If http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...dorset-to-america-in-14ft-dinghy-9675985.html is a description of the incident - I didn't watch the programme - then letting the nutter continue might have raised criticism if his body had ever been found.

Might have raised criticism, yes, but of the RNLI? Sounds like a Police or CG matter to me.

 

[awol]

Might have raised criticism, yes, but of the RNLI? Sounds like a Police or CG matter to me.

It raises the question of how far each of us should go to save another being from what we perceive as harmful folly. With an animal, young child or very old person it is possibly easier to judge whether to intervene. With others "am I my brother's keeper?" can change from a philosophical question to a decision on action/inaction and possible recriminations after whatever is decided.

 

[elton]

If the RNLI beleieves someone needs rescue, the might think if they don't rescue them, they'll probably need a rescue later, which could be under more dangerous circumstances. So best to just get on with it ASAP.

 

[Mark-1]

It raises the question of how far each of us should go to save another being from what we perceive as harmful folly.

In this case the RNLI were clearly right to save the Dinghy sailor sailing to the USA. (Assuming the reporting is correct.)

I'm just arguing that if they hadn't attended a vessel that hadn't requested help then cirtisim would not have been aimed at the RNLI, it would have been aimed at whoever's job it is to stop mentally ill people doing dangerous things.

 

[awol]

In this case the RNLI were clearly right to save the Dinghy sailor sailing to the USA. (Assuming the reporting is correct.)

I'm just arguing that if they hadn't attended a vessel that hadn't requested help then cirtisim would not have been aimed at the RNLI, it would have been aimed at whoever's job it is to stop mentally ill people doing dangerous things.

Sorry, I thought you were arguing that having been alerted to the dinghy by a third party, they should have left the reluctant rescuee to his own devices.

 

[Mark-1]

Sorry, I thought you were arguing that having been alerted to the dinghy by a third party, they should have left the reluctant rescuee to his own devices.

I didn't say that.

 

[Yellow Ballad]

In this case the RNLI were clearly right to save the Dinghy sailor sailing to the USA. (Assuming the reporting is correct.)

I'm pretty sure they said on the program he was sailing down to coast to board another bigger boat (Yacht?) to sail to America although it sounds better if they push the "sailing to America" bit. I can understand why they did it, it seemed pretty obvious his boat wasn't really set up to be 4 miles offshore and he was ignoring their presence but there's no reason an able dinghy sailor shouldn't be there or refuse help.

IMO they did the right thing.

 

[Juan Twothree]

It raises the question of how far each of us should go to save another being from what we perceive as harmful folly. With an animal, young child or very old person it is possibly easier to judge whether to intervene. With others "am I my brother's keeper?" can change from a philosophical question to a decision on action/inaction and possible recriminations after whatever is decided.

If someone doesn't want to be rescued then we can give advice, but can't force anyone to do anything.

The exception is when they are intent on suicide or other self-harm, which my particular lifeboat gets called to quite often. In that case we can grab/restrain them, or do whatever is reasonably necessary, on the basis that they are not in a position mentally to make rational decisions.

 

[Juan Twothree]

I must admit I have given up watching this series as it is a bit cringeworthy at times. One or two very impressive rescues interspersed with a lot of over dramatic stuff about rescuing dogs and the like. I can't help wondering if there is a bit of acting up for the cameras in such situations.


I don't think there was any acting up, it was all in the editing and commentary. My station was one of those issued with Go Pros; we soon forgot the cameras were there, and just got on with things as usual.
However nothing very exciting happened in the months when they were collecting footage, or at least, nothing that could be shown. Doing CPR on someone who didn't survive wasn't deemed suitable family viewing.

The most annoying thing for me has been the silly siren noise which has been dubbed over every launch. The producers came across such a siren at one particular station when filming the previous series, and decided it should be heard everywhere.