"Term limits" on certifications

[MikeFerrara]

Hey Mike, that would be called a "PADI Five Star Resort"....

LOL. No. Just a 5 star resort.

 

[MHK]

MHK, I too do not wish to go into back and forth on the DIR versus the world issue. Further, I don't think I ever accussed you or any DIR diver of being "...elitist, arrogant, snobs, or even zealots."

To quote Jablonski in a recent interview "Having said all of that, one can still make significant strides toward improving their diving by incorporating many DIR concepts into their own diving in a wide variety of arenas." SOMETHING I BELIEVE IN.

The subtelties of the linguistic game are often times lost in translation so I wanted to be clear when I say that no one cares how anyone else dives is to say that those that want to adopt a DIR style of diving, we're happy to help, those that don't want to adopt a DIR style I wish them well.. That said, I'd rather this thread not go off in a DIR direction inasmuch as I believe the underlying issue of this thread was whether or not a c-card once issued should certify a diver for a lifetime. I suppose reasonable points can be raised on either side, and I note Mike Ferrara made an excellent point about actually seeing a diver in the water -v- sending in a log book. I suppose Mike in a perfect world I'd love to see that as well, I'm just not sure how to work out the mechanics. We discussed this point extensively, but in the final analysis couldn't construct a system compatible with GUE's relatively small instructor core..

As to the subset of this thread respecting potential government involvement, in order to appreciate the possibility one must look at how government has worked in the past to consider how they may stick their toe into this issue. Other ideas that involved "freedom of choices" have been resolved by the government by widening the scope of the "choice". For example, many states have implemented a helmut law for motorcyclists. The motorcyclists claim that they should be free to choose whether to wear a helmut, or not. The government cited excessive medical costs in treating motorcyclists accidents, and therefore invented a reason to save you from yourself, by saying it costs other taxpayers. Smokers claim that they should be free to choose whether to smoke or not, the government widened the loop and are going to save people from themselves because of second hand smoke. Auto drivers believe that whether to wear a seat belt, or not, should be there "choice". Again the government sees it another way.. I could go on all day with "choices" that we believe we should be free to make, but politicians make a career out of shifting the focus of the debate into other areas as an excuse to bloviate and appear as though they are for "safety", it's the classic Potomac two step.. I just don't want to give them additional ammunition..

Regards

 

[MHK]

I understood what you said. My point was that I'm not so sure that agency regulation is better than government regulation.

I'm for forcing the agencies totally out of any regulatory role limiting their activities to selling training. The school I went to has no say in what kind of work I do, how or when and I sure don't see any reason why I would be willing to be subjected to the will of some training agency for as long as I live just because I once took a class from an instructor who taught their course. I'll bet I wouldn't even be asked to vote.

I guess it's the lesser fo two evils ;-) BTW, thanks for the kind words above..

I guess I fall on the side of keeping government out of this. Despite the fact that the status of the industry is a mess right now, if the government gets involved, it will be an over regulated mess with the potential for the bureacrats to tax it. Moreover, as of right now, the marketplace still has an effect and I suspect you are starting to see the pendulum swing back in favor of higher quality training, whereas once the government gets involved the marketplace will have less of an impact and only the big agencies will be able to afford political influence so we'll get government regulated nonsense, bought and paid for by certain agencies ;-)

Regards

 

[stoddu]

Look to the statistics presented earlier that graphically indicate obesity is a major factor in dive-related deaths. MANY of the deaths recorded here in Catalina waters, especially at the Dive Park, were obese divers out of shape for such an activity so the overall statistics are very similar to my anecdotal experience here on Catalina.

Dr. Bill

Dr. Bill,
By your own admission you put yourself in the highest statistical weight category (overweight), and although I'm not sure, I believe you are in the highest statistical age category (50-59), therefore, should you be prevented from diving? And, according to many of the responses in the accident forums, not having a buddy nearby is the reason for most of the deaths, should you be prevented from diving solo (as is the rule in Laguna Beach)? There are people out there who are excellent swimmers who can't SCUBA dive because the can't stand to breathe underwater. There are those of us who are not the best swimmers who are very comfortable underwater. I think a better way to address the problem is to have inexpensive ($25) refresher days once a month at dive schools or even dive clubs. Maybe offer an inexpensive skills review DVD ($5-$10) ) that is a refresher on all of the important skills and has a reminder of all of the risk factors. Lynne Cox, the great distance swimmer, was 5'6" and 180lbs. which would probably put her in the obese category -- I wouldn't want to be the one to deny her a cert. card because she was overweight.

Unlike flying, skydiving, and driving a car; being a bad open water diver is not going to kill innocent and uninformed people. Everyone who was certified should have been informed of the risks and demonstrated diving skills. We live in a free society where we are allowed to make choices that don't endanger others. If an unhealthy person makes a choice to go diving even though they know it might kill them, who are we to say they can't?

 

[MikeFerrara]

BTW, thanks for the kind words above..

Just called like I saw it but you're welcome.

we'll get government regulated nonsense, bought and paid for by certain agencies ;-)

Regards

I tend to think this is very true.

 

[darylm74]

I have to say I totally agree. I took a nine year hiatus and when going on a cruise, decided it was time to get back into diving. The FIRST thing I did was take a refresher course. It was in a pool but at least I got back into the swing of things. I then went back home to Tennessee (I live in PA) to dive with my OW instructor because I felt comfortable with him. My next dive was 104ft in the grand caymans (I know beyond OW limits, but lets not go there). I was perfectly at ease. I have done more real diving in the past year and have my AOW along with other certs like ice and I can't wait till the next time I'm in the water. I think out-of-shape is can be subjective. I am 6'0, 240lbs but I am in the gym 5 days a week and a lot of it is muscle, though I still am considered obese. When my knee isn't giving me trouble can run 2 miles up and down the hills around here better than some of the teenagers can. I think that you should have to take a refresher if you don't dive regularly though the out-of-shape issue may be a hard one to judge. All I know is my doctor does a lot of the highschool sports medicine in this area and when he say's Daryl, its time to quit, I will take his advice. Until then, I keep diving....

 

[drbill]

Dr. Bill,
By your own admission you put yourself in the highest statistical weight category (overweight), and although I'm not sure, I believe you are in the highest statistical age category (50-59), therefore, should you be prevented from diving? And, according to many of the responses in the accident forums, not having a buddy nearby is the reason for most of the deaths, should you be prevented from diving solo (as is the rule in Laguna Beach)? There are people out there who are excellent swimmers who can't SCUBA dive because the can't stand to breathe underwater. There are those of us who are not the best swimmers who are very comfortable underwater. I think a better way to address the problem is to have inexpensive ($25) refresher days once a month at dive schools or even dive clubs. Maybe offer an inexpensive skills review DVD ($5-$10) ) that is a refresher on all of the important skills and has a reminder of all of the risk factors...

Unlike flying, skydiving, and driving a car; being a bad open water diver is not going to kill innocent and uninformed people. Everyone who was certified should have been informed of the risks and demonstrated diving skills. We live in a free society where we are allowed to make choices that don't endanger others. If an unhealthy person makes a choice to go diving even though they know it might kill them, who are we to say they can't?

I am overweight but by no means in the highest statistical category, morbidly obese(muscle weighs more than fat). I'm also in outstanding condition for a person of my age (my lung capacity is 4X that expected for my age and body type). I keep in shape. I have outdived many buddies in their 20's and 30's (male and female). No, on that basis I'm in great shape for diving (at least so far).

Yes, I dive solo about 80% of the time. Statistically I am MUCH safer doing so. When diving buddied up, I have had an incident rate more than 20X that of when I dive solo... all due to the buddy.

As has been stated before in this thread, a diver out of shape or inexperienced often DOES put others in jeopardy if they are their buddy or put in a position to have to rescue them when something goes wrong (although hopefully those people are not "innocent" and "uninformed"). Others ARE potentially endangered.

I certainly agree that any required refresher course should be reasonably priced and think the idea you propose to implement them is a good idea! It is certainly in keeping with what I had in mind.

Dr. Bill

 

[jakubson]

Damn, you stole my idea. It hit me last night. The biggest obstacle to VOLUNTARY recertification is the cost. My LDS charges $75 ($25 for pool time, $50 for instructor) for a refresher course (one classroom session plus one pool session) PLUS buying the "Refresher workbook" for $14. That is $89 dollars, which may not be a bad deal if the quality is good enough. I do think that bringing this in for under $50 and ADVERTISING IT HEAVILY (with a course outline so people can see what will be covered) would encourage people who have not been diving to at least have one pool session to brush up on skills, and one classroom session to learn the new ideas on gas management, etc. I know that after I took 6 years off of diving, I would have gone to this type of course IF I HAD KNOWN ABOUT IT. I honestly think the biggest obstacle to people voluntarily taking such a refresher is simply lack of knowledge.

There's another obstical that I mentioned earlier. What level would you have people recertify to? It's simple if a diver has an OW cert from a single agency but what about folks who have piles of certs from a multitude of agencies? Would you have them pay a bunch of money and show up someplace to demonstrate that they can clear a mask?LOL

I think you miss my point. INSTEAD of a recertification requirement, I believe the cost and availability of REFRESHER courses should be looked at. This would treat the disease (unprepared divers) on a voluntary basis, without adding new levels of officialdom.

 

[drbill]

Well, since I'm not in my "right mind", let me see what you suggested and what GUE suggests...

That's my take on your suggestions but since my mind's not quite right ... I may be wrong...

Rather than stooping to your level and questioning your mental faculties, I'd like to propose something...

You have no sense of humor? My comment was not intended seriously (I'm a marine ecologist not a psychiatrist!) nor was it directed specifically at you (or any other individual).

You pointed out some interesting similarities between my thinking and that of GUE. What I was referring to is that I do not criticize the way others dive (unless it involves obvious problems like standing on a coral reef, taking game out of season, etc.), because there are many different styles depending on what one's purpose in diving is. It was in that respect that I've never been linked to GUE/DIR by anyone before. However, I do find their policies which you pointed out to be wise ones IMHO.

Dr. Bill

 

[MHK]

I have to say I totally agree. I took a nine year hiatus and when going on a cruise, decided it was time to get back into diving. The FIRST thing I did was take a refresher course.

I think what many of us are suggesting is to require a refresher class in that scenario, as opposed to hoping that everyone will act responsibly. Diving is a sport that requires skill, it requires a diver to be trained in the use of life support equipment, and much like nearly all other certifications I can think of, should require some type of continuing education in order to remain valid. I don't see much of an uproar created because CPR cards expire, or drivers licenses expire but the problem that currently exists is that holders of a "certification" have now a sense of entitlement that is along the lines of "I have it and therefore no one should be able to take it away." It's an understandable point given the industry's desire to create pavlovian dog type divers. When you consider that the business model of certain agencies was built upon the success of the Boy Scout merit badge model, you quickly see that once a diver "earns" a "merit badge" a.k.a. a c-card they believe it reflects a skill that lasts a lifetime. Except that we know as a sport that requires the use of life support equipment has the ability for such skills to erode over time so I believe that it's reasonable to require some type of expiration date. Tying knots or whatever other skill that is reflected by a Boy Scout merit badge hardly can be equated in that context.

And BTW those that are arguing about the individuals "right" to engage in unsafe activities that don't endanger anyone else but themsleves, may want to consider the feelings of the daughter and husband that watched the mother die in the incident that sparked this thread. The mother certainly had the "right" to dive since it didn't endanger others, but to the extent it could have been prevented by a simple requirement of a refresher course, I say go for it. Bear in mind I'm not familiar enough with the facts in the instant case, I'm just going by what was posted so far in this thread.

Lastly, and I don't mean to point you out specifically since it's a comment I hear often, but your position is an extremely paradoxical position. On the one hand, it's clear you recognize the need for training in the abscence of continued diving since as you said "The FIRST thing I did was take a refresher course." [emphasis added on FIRST]. Obviously, you recognized the importance and took prudent action, but when facing the possibility that such prudent action is codified, or required, in some fashion you took just the opposite point of view and turned it into a "rights" issue. I find discussions like this truely informative because I see it all the time. You clearly know that the underlying concept is the better course of action, and you even went so far as to undertake that very course of action, but if an agency required it of you, all too many see it as some type of an infringement of a "personal freedom".. I find it fascinating talking to other divers.. Oh well..

Regards