Is dive certification really necessary?

[Eric Sedletzky]

Just like the tittle asks, is it?
I’m really starting to wonder.

Case and point.
I went diving with a guy several years ago that supposedly was certified and I ended up rescuing the him because of his gross incompetence. He was allegedly OW certified by his brother in law with a private class. Upon questioning him after the incident it was apparent the he knew next to nothing about basic scuba.

More recently, I met up with another friend of mine down in Monterey on a Sunday to do a congratulatory fun dive with him on the last day of his ocean dive portion of his OW class.
There were several things that either he forgot or never learned on his SSI class, like 15’ safety stop, water pressure and expanding gas laws, and a few other things.

This got me thinking, there really is no law that says you must be certified to go scuba diving. There are no scuba police, there are on scubaboard, but not out in the real world. It’s not like driving cars, flying planes, or cutting hair professionally.
The only thing that a person wouldn’t be able to do is get on a charter boat or dive at a resort, or some other commercial venue that requires proof of certification.

An individual could buy a full set of gear and in most cases get air fills, or buy their own compressor and be free to do as much private boat diving and or shore diving as they desire.
It is possible to read enough information in books like The New Science of Skin and Scuba Diving, plus other printed material and video’s online to glean all the information necessary to understand all the critical protocols to dive safely.
What is the difference between taking the course online and reading the info in a book?

The pool portion, what if a person was to do all the exercises and drills as outlined in the book as opposed to a class setting? The discipline needed to do the drills and not lying to yourself would be the thing. What if someone was exceptionally motivated and had the highest personal integrity to do it correctly, would it be as good or better than a class?
What about mentors? Not instructors, but mentors - peers that buddy with you and take you out to learn the ropes of real dives.

How many people have I seen that barely get by doing skills and this is in a class setting?
How many people have I seen getting answers wrong on the test but the instructor talks them past it and it gets marked as reviewed and they move on?
How many people have I seen pass a basic OW class that shouldn’t have?
Plenty in my opinion, too many.
Some were clearly not mentally and physically competent enough to be set free into the wild and expected to survive a basic OW dive on their own with a buddy, maybe on vacation with a divemaster holding their hand the whole time, but is this really the definition of an OW diver? I have a different description of what a “diver” is. To answer the question, no I have never seen anyone NOT pass.
So what is the point?

It seems to me that anyone determined enough to learn how to dive on their own, and is informed enough to know how to educate themselves enough to be able to do this activity safely would almost be in a better position.

What is lacking is an independent certifying agency that does tests only upon successful completion of the skills. They would not be affiliated with any dive shop or dive school. You learn how to dive either through a school or you can home school yourself. When you feel you can pass you go to the certifying agency and take both the written and in-water skills test for a fee. Upon successful completion they issue you a certification independent of any dive center or dive business/brand etc.

Think in terms of contractors licenses, drivers licenses, or a test only smog shop. These are “test only” type agencies.
In this case a “certification” would only be needed in cases for commercial passage.

I want to discuss this as a thought experiment.

 

[Lostdiver71]

As a PADI instructor I have refused to certify several students that would not master the appropriate skills as required. I have had complaints filed with PADI over it but because I documented all of the issues correctly the complaint were discarded after they investigated. You do not show that you can perform the appropriate skills or learn the required knowledge you shall not pass! I have gone out of my way many times to help students that are struggling with great success, but they have to want to learn the skills and not just expect to pay and pass! There is a big difference between seeing something in a book and having a skilled teacher actually demonstrate the skills and assist you with the technique. I also have refused to take students out in conditions that I did not feel were appropriate for teaching Open Water Students. I have also seen another instructor take those same students out and certify them despite the conditions. I do not believe they ever dove in Florida again, the rush was they were taking a vacation to the Caribbean and wanted to complete the certification before they left instead of doing the referral at their destination, which I believe was twice our price for the referral! They had the money and were just too cheap! Fortunately that shop is out of business and that Instructor is no longer teaching but unfortunately there are still too many that are willing to cut corners. I quit the shop shortly after that incident and stopped working full time in the industry. The problem with your idea is the liability, without a proper teaching system with set learning goals and progression they would never be able to get insured and would probably get sued successfully after the first death for millions of dollars.

 

[stuartv]

 

[ToneNQ]

Here we are bound by a code of practice, the requirement to be certified (certificated) is enshrined in law. You're right in what you say, you can feasibly dive regularly and no one will notice. If you were self sufficient, buy your own gear and compressor etc, you would bypass the 'scuba police', but you'd never get on a dive charter.

Same for driving, you can buy a car, register and insure it, no one asks to see your license specifically if you have other forms of identification. Its only when you get in trouble that it matters. Or when some else has their insurance on the line that you get asked to show certification. Doing your own electrical work, giving financial or legal advice, its all fun and games until someone loses an eye.

I don't see that an independent agency fixes this. Quality of training and verification of completion is a fraction of the problem. If I don't have training, or I am never asked to show a qualification, the rigour surrounding the qualification process is a moot point.

 

[nolatom]

Why'd my parents make me go to school every day? Couldn't a guy just go to the library himself, teach himself to read, then read all the great books, lecture to himself, give himself tests and grade them?

What you describe sounds so much more difficult, expensive (air compressor) and convoluted, than taking a class, doing the open water skills and trying not to dive with bozos. Yes, there are people (though I suspect few) who could and would go to all that trouble and expense to avoid doing it the way 99 percent of scuba divers do? And not being allowed on the dive boat after all that work?

I'm reminded of a Doonesbury comic strip long ago, where BD, in order to get out of writing a term paper, enlisted in the Army and shipped out to Vietnam ;-)

And where are you finding all these bozos? I have way fewer dives than you, frequently take instabuddies, and found almost all of them to be competent.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

The problem with your idea is the liability, without a proper teaching system with set learning goals and progression they would never be able to get insured and would probably get sued successfully after the first death for millions of dollars.

The liability with whom?
If a person is self taught and gets equipment and a tank full of air then hurts themselves who get sued?
“Proper teaching system”, that one can be highly debated. To me the term “It’s the instructor, not the agency” reeks of incompetence and corruption. It never should get that bad that an agency like PADI or any of the other ones think they could put full trust into something as unreliable as a human. The AGENCY should be the one doing final testing, not some shady instructor that can hide in a cloak of incompetence and cronyism. PADI should have their own testing facility that you go to for your final testing. You pay your money and you get your card. There would be no more turning in bad instructors once the damage is done and no more “Instructor not agency” crap.
But more to the point, if someone chooses to home school themselves on how to dive locally and they are completely self sufficient, can this be done safely and successfully?

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Here we are bound by a code of practice, the requirement to be certified (certificated) is enshrined in law. You're right in what you say, you can feasibly dive regularly and no one will notice. If you were self sufficient, buy your own gear and compressor etc, you would bypass the 'scuba police', but you'd never get on a dive charter.

Same for driving, you can buy a car, register and insure it, no one asks to see your license specifically if you have other forms of identification. Its only when you get in trouble that it matters. Or when some else has their insurance on the line that you get asked to show certification. Doing your own electrical work, giving financial or legal advice, its all fun and games until someone loses an eye.

I don't see that an independent agency fixes this. Quality of training and verification of completion is a fraction of the problem. If I don't have training, or I am never asked to show a qualification, the rigour surrounding the qualification process is a moot point.

The difference is that’s it’s illegal to drive without a license but there is no legal precedent that says you can not dive without a certification.
In diving certification you must go to an instructor that is affiliated with an agency to get certified. To get a drivers license you can go anywhere you please to learn how to drive, a school, your parents, etc. then you go to the department of motor vehicles and take the written and driving test and if you pass you get your license. Driving is a quite a bit more critical for safety to the general public than diving I think. The learning part and the license part are completely detached.
Ironic.

 

[Streydog]

When I was certified I did it on a whim on vacation. I was competent enough to pass all the skills and know the basics but it was the classic case of I didn't know what I didn't know. Right after certification I was not a danger to myself or others but I was far from what you would consider a good diver. This Summer I have been buddying up with a guy that was certified this year, we started diving together on his 13th dive. He had spent a lot of time researching diving and watching videos online prior to getting certified. If I didn't know I would swear he had at leadt 50 dives under his belt on our first dive together. I think you can get a lot of information about diving on your own but you would still need at least a mentor in the water to make sure you don't mess up too bad.

I wonder what certification many of the fisherman on islands and coastal areas around the world have?

 

[Still Kicking]

I agree the training is watered down way to much but then I think, the recent OW certs are not dying in droves.

Either:

1. poorly trained divers self select and drop out right after certification.

2. OW certification gives students just enough training to survive until they learn how to really dive by experience and/or AOW.

3.God protects the feeble minded, lost children and newly certified OW students.

Take your pick.

One thing I know is that very few people will pay what it would actually cost to train a really competent diver.

 

[ScubaWithTurk]

The liability with whom?
If a person is self taught and gets equipment and a tank full of air then hurts themselves who get sued?
“Proper teaching system”, that one can be highly debated. To me the term “It’s the instructor, not the agency” reeks of incompetence and corruption. It never should get that bad that an agency like PADI or any of the other ones think they could put full trust into something as unreliable as a human. The AGENCY should be the one doing final testing, not some shady instructor that can hide in a cloak of incompetence and cronyism. PADI should have their own testing facility that you go to for your final testing. You pay your money and you get your card. There would be no more turning in bad instructors once the damage is done and no more “Instructor not agency” crap.
But more to the point, if someone chooses to home school themselves on how to dive locally and they are completely self sufficient, can this be done safely and successfully?

The company that gave them a gas fill or rented them a cylinder without them being certified would likely get sued. I have never gotten a fill or rented a cylinder without being asked for my card unless they know me and have seen that card in the past.

I find you calling instructors shady to be a bit inflammatory for no good reason.

As for divers not being competent, I know of two people who have had to come back for additional dives due to them not understanding basic concepts.