Well everyone has a comment on this so why not??
Mark Inglis (the guy who lost both his legs to frost bite on Mt Cook, and who has since won a Paralympic Silver medal) recently climbed Mt Everest - no mean feat for an able body person - let alone a double amputee.
About halfway up his carbon fibre legs snapped (he taped them back together!) but eventually he got there. An incredible story.
But
Along the way his party passed an English solo climber who was basically dying. Now the party stopped to check on him, but did nothing and moved on.
Now lets be clear - over the couple of days that the Englishman was camped up and dying - 40 other people also passed him, only the NZ party actually bothered to stop.
Which brings us to the classic question - do you help him. All of us non-climbers have heard how you just don't, and I had assumed the media were making way to much out of it, but then Sir Edmund Hillary jumped in and said they were out of line, and that his party would have definitely stopped. The PM (who has climbed K2 - so knows a bit) said it was a bit harsh to put it all on Inglis - there were 40 others.
Rob Hall's wife (famous NZ climber who died up everest a couple of years back) Jan Arnold said Inglis couldn't be blamed, but as John Campbell said - it does look like the choice they made was between - climbing the mountain, or saving the mans life.
To be honest though - these expeditions only carry just enough oxygen and supplies for themselves, helping this guy out, could have potentially cost other lives.
But what a choice to have to make. To just keep on going knowing that man needs help.
UPDATE:
In todays Dominion (25 May) Inglis replies with quite a good analogy which puts things into perspective for us non-climbing types - "......... if someone standing on a bridge fell into the Huka Falls, would you jump in after them? At 8500m it's phenomenally difficult just to keep yourself alive." Inglis also points out that other people in their party were far better qualified than him to be of assistance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
it's pretty easy for sir ed to sit back all these years later and say, "yeah, I would've given up my attempt at being the first man to climb everest in order to help a dying man". If Inglis and his party had stopped and stayed with the man, he still wouldn't have survived. Inglis would have just been risking death himself.
Its unfortunate for Inglis, that since he is the only high profile person in the party - he's wearing this. The key point for me is that 40 others passed him and did nothing - most didnt even bother to stop (which I cannot grasp. I agree its easy for people who havent been in that situation to say I would have stopped. Another point is that the guy was above 8000m at the time, so its not just a case of staying with him till help choppers in, it would have been a huge feat in itself to essentially lug 80 or 90kgs down the mountain.
You're right, no one is really focusing on the fact that Inglis and his group were actually the only ones to stop and offer aid. Another point that you raise is about Inglis' high profile and how he is the one wearing the blame... expedition leader Russell Brice made the call to leave the man, not Inglis. Inglis radioed for help for the man.
How do we know that no other groups stopped to say "hi"? I presume the man hasnt really spoken about it all since he is dead?!...
Post a Comment