Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Work as a dive proffessional for an agency.What can a DM do that an AOW student can't?
A DM rating is a professional credential, so a DM can work in the industry. If you don't have an interest in working with divers, then the rating is pretty much only good for bragging rights. You can get the same level of knowledge without actually taking the tests for DM. And you can achieve the same level of diving competence through other sorts of mentorship (DM training entails becoming a mentee to your instructor).What can a DM do that an AOW can't?
I don't want to be an instructor particularly, but PADI has 2 educational ladders after Rescue Diver. One of the paths has one item on it, and the other has 3. Since I want to continue to learn, the longer path looks more interesting.
The notion that there are only two paths within PADI after Rescue may not be totally accurate (is not totally accurate). Assuming the stated two paths are DM/AI/Instructor and Specialties/Master Scuba Diver, I'd like to add a third PADI path which just happens to be a skills oriented path.
The third path -- PADI's Tec 40 which has a 40 meter/130 foot depth limit (same as "recreational" diving). This path, perhaps along with the Self-Reliant Diver Specialty, could significantly enhance one's skills as a "recreational" diver. Tec 40 is really part of what I call the "techreational" diving of which every serious diver should be aware. I am not saying getting a Tec 40 card will make one a better diver, but if done properly, should provide a "recreational" diver with a much better skill set.
I strongly disagreed with John McAniff concerning his population estimate, which when multiplied by an activity level estimate determined the denominator and the error bar. John, in fact, publicly admitted (in an Undercurrent interview) that his 3.5 million number was “purely my guesstimates and have been arrived at without any insider information, and may well be inaccurate.” In fact, Robert Monaghan, a NAUI and PADI instructor with doctoral training in statistical modeling, argued that the active diver population was actually closer to 700,000, making diving at least four to five time riskier than John had indicated.I looked through Rubicon and read what I could find. I first of all learned that the early DAN reports are in fact the NUADC reports, and DAN took over their work some time ago. The NUADC-only reports are therefore relatively old. The newest NUADC document I could find was from 1995, and it was a comprehensive analysis of diving fatalities from 1970 to 1994.
McAniff, JJ (National Underwater Accident Data Center, Department of Physical Education, Health, and Recreation, College of Human Science and Services, University of Rhode Island, 1995)
You may be interested in its conclusions (these are direct quotes--emphasis added):The population estimates presented by NUAOC are reasonable and conservative and fall between those presented by other studies.
Fatality rates per 100,000 have decreased considerably, (8.65 in 1976, ••• 2.67 to 3.44 in 1993).
Student deaths are at an all-time low, (1.50 per 100,000 in 1993).
With literally millions of dives, working scuba instructors as a group have suffered only three fatalities (two were heart related) in the 24 year period of this study.
It can be said that recreational scuba diving is a relatively safe activity with fatality rates very near ordinary swimming.
In summary, as far as I can see, the NUADC studies in which you participated indicated that diving in general was much safer in 1995 than in 1976, and that student deaths during instruction had dropped during that period of time to "an all time low."
...
I strongly disagreed with John McAniff concerning his population estimate, which when multiplied by an activity level estimate determined the denominator and the error bar. John, in fact, publicly admitted (in an Undercurrent interview) that his 3.5 million number was “purely my guesstimates and have been arrived at without any insider information, and may well be inaccurate.” In fact, Robert Monaghan, a NAUI and PADI instructor with doctoral training in statistical modeling, argued that the active diver population was actually closer to 700,000, making diving at least four to five time riskier than John had indicated.