Dying Everest Climber - What would you have done?

[silentC]

If realistically the chances of the man's survival were low, should these people really have made a futile effort simply in order to be able to say they did what they could?

I say yes because the alternative (for me at least) would be to spend the rest of my life wondering if I could have done something, no matter how many people told me it was OK, I made the right decision.

There is a short section of an interview with a bloke called Alf Razzell on the Roger Waters CD Amused to Death. He was a British soldier during WWI. His job was to collect the paybooks from the soldiers killed in action. One day he was picked up by the Germans and instructed to take a wounded solidier back:

"Two things that have haunted me most are the days when I had to collect the paybooks; and when I left Bill Hubbard in no-man's-land." "I was picked up and taken into their trench. And I'd no sooner taken two or three steps down the trench when I heard a call, 'Hello Razz, I'm glad to see you. This is my second night here,' and he said 'I'm feeling bad,' and it was Bill Hubbard, one of the men we'd trained in England, one of the original battalion. I had a look at his wound, rolled him over; I could see it was probably a fatal wound. You could imagine what pain he was in, he was dripping with sweat; and after I'd gone about three shellholes, traversed that, had it been...had there been a path or a road I could have done better. He pummeled me, 'Put me down, put me down, I'd rather die, I'd rather die, put me down.' I was hoping he would faint. He said 'I can't go any further, let me die.' I said 'If I leave you here Bill you won't be found, let's have another go.' He said 'All right then.' And the same thing happened; he couldn't stand it any more, and I had to leave him there, in no-man's-land."

I guess we are all different and we all have to make our decisions and live with them.

[namtrak]

This is the sort of question I ask myself a lot. If I was passing a dying mountaineer would I ........

Seriously, everytime I hear of a situation which involves some sort of bravery or selflessness I wonder what I would do in that position. And whilst, I suspect like most people I would like to think that I would do the right thing, you know - dive into the water to drag the people from the car, run into the burning house to drag the cat out, stay by the side of the dying mountaineer etc etc. I reckon I wouldn't know exactly what I would do until I was in situation. So for the time being the best I could offer is to say that, yes of course I would stop and help, but the reality may be different.

I think pyschologists may refer to a couple of scenarios, fight or flight - the act of reacting to any given situation either front on or by hiding - a survival technique. Or the bystander effect - people choose not to help because no-one else is - you know where you hear of people dying on the street and no-one stopping to help.

[CameronPotter]

Well,

Having been at the site of two accidents (in which I wasn't involved) both times I stopped and tried to lend a hand.

Out of interest, both were motorbikes that got skittled.

One time the guy just jumped back up, on his bike and off he went. I tried to stop him, but he wasn't interested...

The other time was far more serious and I ended up spending quite a bit of time there making sure that he was OK and waiting for the ambos and cops to come. In the end there wasn't much else I could do, but I know that I did what I could.

I also know other people who have been in situations of stop and help or drive by and one example was that my mum was first to the scene of a horrible crash a few years ago. Someone died in her arms. It messed her up a bit and she is still ultra-paranoid about road safety, but she knows that she did the right thing by stopping and even though the person didn't survive, there was someone there to make them as comfortable as possible.

As I said before, for me it is a simple answer.

Mind you, to be fair, none of these situations put any "rescuer" in any danger...

Cam

[Bob38S]

Even if he was drawing his last breaths when they found him, to do nothing to assist is a dogs act and I hope they find themselves in a similar position in the very near future.

To neglect a person in need, especially in a life or death situation, and that person MAY have survived with assistance, as far as I'm concerned, YOU are responsible (in part) for the death of that person. I hope their testicles explode. :mad:

Dan:mad:

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Bob

[Daddles]

The thing that makes this case different is not that it happened on a killer mountain, but that they continued past him to achieve their own goals. In otherwords, every one of those 40 climbers placed getting to the top of that mountain ABOVE helping a dying man.

Sorry, those are ##### morals. I don't care how you try to justify it, those bastards left him to die just so they could get their money's worth. :mad:

A human life is more important than any aim or goal or desire or product that you've paid for.

Richard

And yes, I have stopped at quite a few accidents, had a woman die in my arms and spent a couple of hours comforting her husband.

[Zed]

I have been in a couple of situations where I have saved lives but could have looked the other way, I saved a 8 year old kid from drowning in a public pool, administered CPR to a HA victim on a train station, stopped three (2) people from walking out in front of cars, moved a passed out stupified drunk off a road and helped a car strike victim (whilst I was drunk I might add).

I could have walked away in every case but chose not to and helped out where I could. I could take the high road and say that 4 people are alive because of me. the others could be crippled or worse. I have never once seen my victims since our crossed paths of fate.

I think this comes down to what sort of person you are and what motivators are driving you at the time - $75k and a once in a lifetime opp changes perceptions.

in the paper today the rebuttal bu the amputee is published - read it and perhaps we can change our perceptions of what really happened, I suspect the middle path between opposing views is the right one. the deader in the story was, I beleive, climbing alone, and already almost dead when seen, and I might add in the "death zone" 300 m below the summit, the way the amputee tells it he was already dead but didnt know it yet, heating him up would have killed kim anyway and some of his party did spend time with the deader.

I;'ve already said one i 6 die on the mountain, they know the risks when they commence - I beleive you have to qualify before you are granted permission to climb everest anyway - I think you have to get to the top of at least 2 or three other of the 10 summits world wide over 8000m before you can qualify. this bloke was no amateur...

However, I'll conclude by concurring with DanP (?): to not help where you can or have the ability is a dogs act.

[Shedhand]

An interesting diversity of opinion on this matter.
I've seen enough people near death to be able to tell when someone is essentially dun fer.
If I was an adventurer (which these types are) and inured to the risk of death in the pursuit of excitement (as these types are) I think I would have checked the guy over to see if he was a lost cause (an experienced climber would be able to tell) and if so I would have taken the time to build or dig him a snow cave facing east or in the lee of bad weather. I would have made him as comfortable as possible shared a bit of food and drink and then shook his hand and said goodbye offering to deliver any message to his loved ones. I'd feel good knowing I'd made him comfortable and able to see his last sunrise or sunset. If he wasn't a lost cause then another course of action would be necessary but who's to say what that might be.
Its very easy to sit in the comfort of our homes and pontificate about the issue but unless you're johnny on the spot you just can't say what the circumstances dictated at the time.
The poor guy couldn't be interviewed himself obviously so the Heard it Said (Herald Sun) ran the story based on an interview with someone who was angry that the guy wasn't helped. WHo says that view was valid? The Herald Sun? Give me a break guys! The legless Kiwi said it all when he was quoted as saying its hard enough to breath up there as it is without the added burden of trying to bring someone near death down. Why risk another life.

My ten penneth worth.
Cheers (back to the shed).

[silentC]

There was a good letter in the SMH (not the Sun Herald). It concluded "Who assisted Mark Inglis when he needed rescuing in 1982?"

[Studley 2436]

a bit over 20 years ago my old man was working in Antarctica at Casey Station when a man was lost outside in a storm. When it was safe to search they did but weren't able to find him for some time. When they found him his core tempreture was below what they call the point of no return but they still tried to warm him up.

I think Hillary is right that you should just stop to do something even if it is just to make sure the poor bloke doesn't die alone. I suppose it says something about the times we live in because Hillary's generation would just say it is just a bloody mountain but todays generation the mountain is all that matters. Might be a bit Zen in this way of thinking but just to be on that mountain that far up is a huge accomplishment. Do people believe that it means nothing if you don't make the summit? Don't you come down a bigger person were you to attempt to help a fellow human being? I can't help feeling that there was a time when were someone there dying no one would go past because you just don't climb further when someone could die.

Mind you I also think it has become a bit of a tourist run thesedays so many people put in so much so that they can climb it and to them making the summit is the only thing it is their conquest. Was this man who died up there under resourced and a risk to himself and others? Does this show man at his most stupid, most selfish, when it could have shown him at his greatest? Were they all there hypnotised by the tip of that mountain? The man who went when it was risky the others who marched past him?

Studley

[Ianab]

Todays news mentions rescues that were actually carried out that same day. One guy was helped from the summit, but he was still able to walk, with help, and then a team of 18 Sherpas carried him the rest of the way. Another guy was helped down from the last camp (he however died before they got him down.)

Your life is in danger just from being up there, and I'm sure 99% of climbers would help - if there was something that could be done. Body recovery is just not done up there. Another article mentioned the 12 bodies that climbers still walk past to get to the summit. :eek: It's just not humanly possible to get the off the Mt.

Climbing it by yourself or without oxygen is just russian roulette with only 1 chamber empty.


And yes I would ALLWAYS stop at an accident (and have several times). I've hauled people out of the surf and been called out as a search and rescue volunteer. That doesn't mean I'd run into a burning building to recover a body though.

Cheers

Ian

[CameronPotter]

...but while there is still life in that body I wouldn't just leave them.

[Studley 2436]

That is the first thing I was taught about first aid that you never put yourself in a dangerous situation. The last thing worth having is two victims in need of rescue. The example given was if someone is unconscience in a pool of water on the floor make sure there is no electricty flowing. All these things have to be assesed

[dazzler]

SilentC,

I think the ethical dilemma of the climbers was a difficult one. If realistically the chances of the man's survival were low, should these people really have made a futile effort simply in order to be able to say they did what they could?

I remember a similar dilemma happened to me when I was working on a geological expedition in the far south of Ethiopia. We were driving through a village when some villagers stopped us and showed us a baby which had been very badly burnt through falling into a fire. Possibly we could have saved its life, if we had driven some 500 miles to take it to hospital in Addis Abbaba. On the other hand it might well have died on the journey and we would then have been in all sorts of strife. As it was, I am afraid I just left some items from our medical kit, and I doubt if it survived. Am I a monster?

Rocker

No, youre not a monster.

Wrong decision if viewed from a humanitarian angle.
Right decision if viewed from a corporate angle.

I would hope that i would have made the right decision if in the same place.

cheers

dazzler

[dazzler]

I also remember an article about one of the big storms that killed a few on everest. there was a guy sitting on the ground up near the top connected to empty oxgen bottles and saying they were full.

A couple argued with him for ten minutes that they were empty and he was dying but wouldnt budge.

They left him to die.

Big boys games...whose to judge

dazzler

[Rocker]

Dazzler,

I think that it is difficult to invoke absolute standards of morality when you find yourself in extreme circumstances, such as pertain when you are in places like the upper slopes of Everest, or very remote areas hundreds of miles from the nearest vestiges of civilisation. It is a no-brainer that, if you come across a road accident in Australia, that you should stop and help; you may be inconvenienced by doing so, but you are not putting your own life at risk. On Everest. however, you have to be hard-nosed; if attempting to help a badly injured injured climber who will almost certainly die anyway has a high risk that you may lose your own life in the attempt, then I think it is wrong to take that risk.

I have another story of a moral dilemma that happened in to me in the bush in Tanzania. One day on a geological survey, my field party and I came across an old Masai woman in the middle of nowhere in the bush. We asked her if she needed a lift to get home, but she said no - she had gone out into the bush to die, because she was too old to be of any use to anyone any more. So we left her where she was; she was probably eaten by lions a few hours later. If the same thing happened in Australia, I would obviously have acted differently, since facilities exist for helping suicidal or demented people.

The fact is that in third-world countries there is so much poverty and misery, that, if you decided to help everyone you came across who was in difficulty, you could never get anything else done.

Rocker