All aboard were fully aware of the risks. (imo, of course)
I have a hard time with the word "fully." Almost no one goes into a situation like this (or into an operating room)
fully aware of the risks. A lot of expertise and research is needed to even assess the real risks of something like this.
Being told several times "You could die" is not sufficient for me to say they understood the risks. I am aware each time I go out on a boat or up into the sky on a plane that "I could die," but I really don't know all the things that could go wrong.
The 19 year old, in particular was not (imo) capable of assessing the risk.
OTOH, I suppose since 21 passengers had done this safely, the average person might say, "Not all that risky." To me, even a 1% risk is too much when it's not necessary. My students think it sounds great if only "One percent die" from something - but in fact, when I tell them that means, in the classroom that holds 200, 2 of them would be dead at the end of the activity, then they start to shift their perspective. If I tell a class of 50 that if there's a 1% chance of sniper fire as they walk to their cars, that means on average, one of them will die every other day. NO one says they think that sounds just fine.
So I believe people have to be taught some perspective. Seven voyages of Titans resulted in safe exploration for 21 people (plus 14 crew, of whom at least one was the same person each time, so I'm not going to count him, as he broke his record of safety). 34 people have apparently survived this procedure. 34-5. Those are the current odds. I believe that many younger people would think that sounded...okay. Most parents would say it does not sound okay, if they're assessing risk for their minor children (I would surely hope most parents would reject those risks).
But people do stuff every day that shows me their risk assessment ability is faulty and, for me, it takes real dialogue. My own work in SAR (on the lost person behavior aspect) and in National Parks has convinced me that Ghiglieri and other park rangers are right: a person making an important, risky decision all by themselves is almost always at risk. Someone trying to sell someone else risky behavior should face ethical and technical questioning. Two people trying to decide, actively, through dialogue, always fare better.
One of these passengers was a solo passenger. Then, there were the father-son duo. I figure that when a parent decides a risky thing is okay, it has real influence on offspring. I just can't get my mind to believe that the 19 year old was "fully" aware of what could happen. I will even go so far as to state that it's highly unlikely that the 19 year old was mentally ready to face what happened 2 hours into this voyage, when everything went dark.
IMO.
