"Term limits" on certifications

[DiveGolfSki]

WAIT A MINUTE FOLKS... who said anything about GOVERNMENT being involved here? My proposal was based on self-enforcement through dive agencies and the dive shops who fill tanks. Obviously some of you seem to have gotten a bit off the intended track!

I spoke yesterday with one of my instructor friends. He is also a sky diving coach. In that arena he MUST sky dive once within every 30 day period to keep his rating. Very restrictive requirements, all enforced within the industry... not by government.

Dr. Bill

Self Enforcement ..... hmmm interesting concept. A non-governmental agency to monitor the diving industry... isn't that PADI, NAUI, TDI, etc.

A sky diving coach, I assume, instructs someone. If so, he should sky dive often to keep his rating in order to adequately train sky divers. BTW, does he have to re-qualifiy his "Basic" skills equivalent ... (I dunno but do sky divers have to know how to pull a rip cord?, a climb in/out of a plane).

An earlier post alluded to adequate (or inadequate training) as one of the reasons that fatalities occur. Perhaps, you are right that training agencies MUST be regulated in order to provide standard and consistent training. However, some agencies still won't be that responsible PARTICULARLY if there's a profit motive.

Isn't there one agency that has a discover program to get people underwater in resort course? No need for basic training just step right up ladies and gentlemen, don a mask, learn how to clear it, put on a BCD and tank AND let's dive ...
Course, if you want to dive more than 40 feet and be a REAL scuba diver, you'll have to enroll in the advanced classes ... available this afternoon ask your cruise ship director and pay the $200 fee.

Sorry, I digress. Don't we have certain requirements now? If I want to go from AOW and strap a Nitrox tank on, what or who stops me? Dive boats/operator requiring my nitrox certification. If I want to dive into Jenny springs and penetrate 1000 feet into the cave, what or who stops me (aside from the grate).

Self regulation of diver's physical/mental conditioning? Sounds like a jock's only club to me....

 

[DivePartner1]

. . . If Corporate Amerca has the Sarbanes-Oxley act to protect the world against the corrupt CEO's, why not the diving world.

GREAT IDEA!!!

Translating the 'internal controls' requirement of SOX section 404, the dive operator AND all former instructors would be liable for future harm if they fail to confirm and correctly certify every aspect of the divers' qualifications, skills and health -- and you couldn't take the diver's word for it. If the op or instructor is wrong (using a hindsight test), the same one-size-fits-all 20 year sentence of SOX precribes would apply.

And the diver should also have skin in the game: any misleading or incorrect statement -- including level of skills or fitness-- is "fraud" subject to the same 20 year period of reflection and pennance.

Imagine how safe (and spacious) dive boats would be!

 

[ReefGuy]

So, I'm guessing that you aren't concerned about it actually working?

Suppose I don't dive with a computer?

Divers who actually dive can easily show this. (I assume you know how to scroll your own dive computer.) The divers who don't dive can show this as easily too - log book, computer, etc. (Lairs can lie, I know, but those people are not helping themselves...)

Please folks can we focus on the underlined reason why we would do it?

 

[DiveGolfSki]

. . . If Corporate Amerca has the Sarbanes-Oxley act to protect the world against the corrupt CEO's, why not the diving world.

GREAT IDEA!!!

Translating the 'internal controls' requirement of SOX section 404, the dive operator AND all former instructors would be liable for future harm if they fail to confirm and correctly certify every aspect of the divers' qualifications, skills and health -- and you couldn't take the diver's word for it. If the op or instructor is wrong (using a hindsight test), the same one-size-fits-all 20 year sentence of SOX precribes would apply.

And the diver should also have skin in the game: any misleading or incorrect statement -- including level of skills or fitness-- is "fraud" subject to the same 20 year period of reflection and pennance.

Imagine how safe (and spacious) dive boats would be!

Thank you Dive Partner1 and Lead Carrier. My accountant thanks you, my lawyer thanks you, my senator thanks you but most especially my probation officer thanks you....

 

[DiveGolfSki]

On an even more serious note, I think this statement captures the essence of your thread:

"Generally speaking, diving has undergone three primary evolutions: the initiation of recreational diving, the era of demanding almost "military style" training, and the resulting "anyone can dive" backlash. The advent and expansion of early public training procedures tended to be fairly rigorous with divers exposed to an array of challenging exercises. Later, organizations like PADI begin to develop truly viable commercial ventures with the new idea that anyone should be able to dive. With few exceptions that mindset has dominated diver training to the present day. This "anyone can dive mentality" has indeed allowed for tremendous growth in the diving industry but not without its negative repercussions. Indeed, if anyone can dive then certainly nearly anyone can teach. This mentality has led organizations to offer "guaranteed" instructor certifications; further challenging the number of qualified diving leaders and encouraging relaxed training guidelines and devalued instruction.

To be sure, diving education is big business but it is time for that business to put the safety of divers and the reputation of the community ahead of profit. For years we have watched as less came to be expected of divers from instructors that were increasingly unprepared. It takes time to make a good diver and even more time to train a competent instructor. Those are realities that no amount of marketing finesse can eliminate. Many excuses, rationalizations, and debates are had over the state of diving instruction but at a time when instructor trainers are becoming a dime a dozen and certifications seem to grow increasingly worthless a serious change is in order. Many instructors and students are prepared to do whatever it takes to gain proficiency but the industry has cheated them by fostering the belief that short courses and streamlined training are to their benefit. It is time for the agencies to put a stop to the degradation of diving and become a voice for diver proficiency, safety, and responsibility.

Many of the ideas associated with this new curriculum are not novel concepts and undoubtedly there are numerous enclaves of divers around the world struggling for excellence. However, these efforts need to be supported not usurped by a glut of undereducated diving leaders. Indeed, more qualified instructors, longer more comprehensive courses and certifications that expire through inactivity are nearly as old as the sport itself. However, ideas like this are fought by agencies that recognize its cost to their bottom line.

Our pledge is to offer divers and educators a new alternative- one that is not afraid to take a stand for safety over financial gain and quality over quantity..."

A SPECIAL BONUS GOES TO THE PERSON WHO CORRECTLY IDENTIFIES WHERE THIS IS FROM!!!

 

[immersed]

You can teach people the components of safe diving, but you can't compel them to dive safely. You can tell them over and over how dangerous it can be, to dive within their training, to take refresher courses, to keep their equipment in good working order, etc. but when it comes to the bottom line they can still wander off and get bent or kill themselves.

Given reasonable conditions, diving safely is more of a mindset than anything else. Any of us sitting here can easily create scenarios which become unreasonable (what if your inflater gets stuck then your alternate doesn't work because you dragged it through the gravel and your weight belt falls off...) so obviously I'm not trying to assert that scuba diving is simply mind-over-matter; to that end, we're even trained to deal with [relatively] common emergencies.

My assertion is that each diver chooses to dive safely or chooses to dive unsafely. Part of that choice is to seek proper training, keep skills current, and keep gear in good working order. In most of our opinions, dropping into the ocean after a 5 year surface interval is unwise at best. That diver could do the required recertification and then promptly swim into a cave or wreck without so much as a light or line. That diver could demonstrate excellent buoyancy control, be able to remove and replace gear at depth, swim a bezillion yards, but could still silt up a wreck so badly that exit becomes highly unlikely, could swim into a kelp forest or known fishing area without a knife or shears, or dive in current off the shore with no sausage, mirror, or smb.

So you're saying, 'wull yeah, for those who want to be that dumb we can only help so much, but recertification could still help'. Forget the logistics of how to go about doing it on a global scale with multiple cert agencies, the point is that it wouldn't have that much of an impact - trying to implement a recertification process is really just drawing a line in the sand further down the road to stupidity. Those who realize the value of refreshing their skills already do it whether it's through formal re-education or tuneup dives in backyard pools and easy dive sites. People who are h*ll-bent on getting themselves into trouble managed to certify once; they'll manage to recertify. Those of us who choose to dive safely are self-motivated to do so, whether that motivation is fueled by a desire to learn and excel at our interest or by simple self-preservation. For us recertification becomes, as mentioned previously, an inconvenient time/money waster and doesn't change the fact that we will continue to choose to dive safely.

Basically what I'm saying is that you won't reach your target audience or address the true problem - you'd just be doing something that 'feels good' and 'seems like it makes sense' and 'we don't understand why people are still drowning'. When you say that those who find ways to circumvent whatever system you put in place are "just hurting themselves", those are the people that need the help!! The rest of us get it!


As to unskilled/unfit divers placing their rescuers in jeapordy, while this is a valid obervation I'm not really understanding the point. If you as a would-be rescuer choose to not place yourself in peril because you are not trained to do so or simply because you don't have a desire to get yourself perished, I don't see how anyone could feel justified in trying to make you feel bad about it. If you do choose to put yourself in peril, that is your choice as much as the unfit diver's choice was to dive. As far as I'm concerned it's between the victim and rescuer; if I rescued someone and someone else tried to tell me 'oh but it's not fair that he put you in that situation' I believe my response would be 'what's it to you?'. From what I understand of pay scales of rescue workers, they ain't doing it to get rich; they put themselves in harm's way for a higher purpose, find it highly gratifying, and any I've seen interviewed humbly say "I was just doing my job". But maybe they don't put the ones who say "well that guy's a complete moron, I'm sorry I just put him back in the gene pool, and I can't wait until I get that desk job" on television.

 

[redrover]

Dr. Bill are you a member of Congress? You should be. I think you hit something here. We must regulate people especially divers who are irresponsible, out of shape and incapable of making any rational decisions. If Corporate Amerca has the Sarbanes-Oxley act to protect the world against the corrupt CEO's, why not the diving world. Therefore, I suggest that we contact Senators: Boxer, Inouye, Graham, Byrd, Reid and Obama to sponsor a bill regulating the dive industry (use their initials as the name of the bill). A new agency will be created ... the Department of Diveland Security. All your points will clearly form the fundamentals of the laws and regulations except for the following changes:….

I hope this was another ironic display of humor, because it conveyed my opinion providing a good hearty chuckle.

I for one, detest being required to follow rules, preferring to make my choices from recommendations. drbill, I think I understand your grumble, especially if divers dive, no need to re-cert. But I think people are going to circumvent recommendations regardless, therefore such additional ‘rules’ would primarily contribute to agency income and accomplish little to solve your complaint.
I re-cert and my annual physical the next week identifies I have heart disease. So, does my having re-certed make heart disease irrelevant? I re-cert then gain 60#, is that irrelevant to my safety because I just recertified?
I was briefly acquainted with a fellow that was an insulin dependent diabetic, 57 years old, had 1 heart attack @ 45, had lost 90 pounds and was suggesting we learn to dive together. He intended to deny all points on the PADI registration requiring Physician approval and was pretty happy with his weight (@ 5’ 10” 265#, his arm size less than he liked.) Frankly, I was aghast. I felt obligated by personal ethics and morals to encourage physician consultation but wanted no part of being in a class with him even should he get approval. He did BTW from his endocrinologist who was happy with his weight, or so he told me.
While it was my choice not to pursue a relationship with this man (that had many other very fine qualities) I would not support his being denied freedom of choice. Perhaps people are not refreshing or confirming their skills or fitness, but they are taught and recommended to do so. They can just lie about it and probably all divers can cite examples.
Rules and regulations or no rules and regulations, people will engage in activities hazardous to their health. Does having re-certed provide any guarantee I am not going to cause you the distress of seeing my lifeless body?

Re: rescuers being at risk; if I am a professional (and, I have been), I chose potential risky employment. No one ‘made’ me assume the risk; that is what I signed up to do. As for volunteering, I always can refuse the request. I feel it is in a way admirable for a police officer, who is in general expected to be all things to all people, to admit his limitations.
I was just reminded how when comfortable, we can forget someone else may view the same situation entirely different. When I first snorkeled at a nearby site I thought I was reasonably comfortable in the water. A friend took me out to see something and I verged upon abject terror. Over time and frequent visits, it became no big deal. And now diving that site and surfacing far further out, I’m amazed how close to shore it is.

While I agree many people are not at optimum weight and it appears obesity is a significant factor in diving deaths, I resent the ‘fat bodies’ derision from many posters. My first 45 years, never gaining weight eating whatever and as much I wanted, I had countless young athletic friends express envy (their metabolism being the opposite) and while sympathetic, I was not empathetic. Then like a light switch from off to on, my metabolism did an abrupt about face. And 5 years later I’m having the dickens of a time retraining myself in the absence of hunger to eat frequently.

In your example of being a very experienced diver, traveling with (if I understood you correctly) an obscure certification, required to prove competency and not minding it; all well and good. Certainly a good idea and recommended had you not been diving for several months according to my training agency, and more so had your experience been freshwater. However, were I experienced as you, having slaved and saved for vacation diving, I would resent the time and expense.

The point is freedom of choice. I prefer a society where each person is free to choose what risk level and activities they wish. As long as they do no harm to others ie DUI, whatever floats their boat.

 

[mrobinson]

The point is freedom of choice. I prefer a society where each person is free to choose what risk level and activities they wish. As long as they do no harm to others ie DUI, whatever floats their boat.

This attitude is something that sets us apart. Oh well. I guess we'l have to agree to disagree. But I thought it was a good discussion - thanks for letting me express my point of view.
Have fun diving everyone.

 

[MHK]

WAIT A MINUTE FOLKS... who said anything about GOVERNMENT being involved here? My proposal was based on self-enforcement through dive agencies and the dive shops who fill tanks. Obviously some of you seem to have gotten a bit off the intended track!

I spoke yesterday with one of my instructor friends. He is also a sky diving coach. In that arena he MUST sky dive once within every 30 day period to keep his rating. Very restrictive requirements, all enforced within the industry... not by government.

Dr. Bill

The problem, or perhaps better said, the cause of the problem, is that the industry is a reactionary, consumer-based industry that has allowed the inmates to run the asylum and now that the direction of the industry has been co-opted by the consumer it's an uphill battle trying to turn the ship back around. It always amazes me when I read certain threads on this board, and others, wherein it's the students that dictate the terms and conditions upon which they want to get certified, as opposed to the agency spelling out the terms.. I strongly believe that by capitulating to the "flexible" demands of the students in an effort to reach a wider audience the industry placed a substanially reduced premium on the value of what they had to offer, which is an education. If everything I can teach you can be reduced to a DVD, then either I don't know very much or the level of information that I want to communicate has been so dramatically reduced as to be insufficient. In order for concepts like remote learning or e-learning to work they need to allow for the lowest common denominator, and as you can plainly see the lowest common denominator is getting lower and lower year in and year out. I don't see how a video that must allow for a 12 year old diving in Cayman-like conditions prepares adequately a diver that may dive regularly in the northeast, or in any other demanding environment globally. These ideas are good from the perspective of being a shareholder in the agency, they're good ideas if you own a resort in a warm tropical vacation destination, but the end user, ie; the student gets a product that is dilluted by the desire to be more inclusive and more far reaching.

Bill, as you note, certification cards should expire, as should instructor cards. GUE has done that since inception. I periodically teach at Casino Point, and did so as recently as a few weeks ago, and I'm constantly amazed at the poor quality of instruction I see routinely displayed at that park. Truckloads [or ferry loads in the instant case] lined up, overweighted, planted on their knees while the instructor goes down the list of his slate and goes skill by skill. I mean basically the class is to have a DM set the float, the students pull themselves down the float and then spends the rest of the dive on their knees doing a few skills and then they come right up the float line. More often then not the class never even swims.. This is what passes for "certification", and then that c-card is good for the rest of that divers life, irrespective of whether or not that diver ever enters the water again, 40 years from now that same diver can show up on a boat and dive.. The industry is too afraid that if they take a stand that they'll loose customers so they regularly capitulate and allow the "customers" to dictate terms. In my mind, the customer is always right approach has no place in dive instruction..

I wish when I was in Grad school, or studying for the CPA exam that I could have dictated the terms by which I wanted to dillute the process, it would have saved a heck of a lot of studying ;-)

Regards

 

[maggs_the]

I got my OW cert last April and followed up with specialty classes on Nitrox, Navigation, Night/Lim Viz, Boat Diving and a CPR class, all through my local dive shop. I have 29 open water dives and am now SSI classified as ADVANCED open water certified... and I'm here to tell you that I am in no way an Advanced diver. In fact, I do not show my AOW card and instead present my OW card unless I want to use Nitrox. I did the classes, watched the videos, copied the answers from the book, and did the dives. I really have to say I thought it would have been much more difficult to get my OW certification and even more so with regards to the AOW, but all I had to do was show up, give my money, copy the answers (in one class, write them down as the instructor read them aloud to the class) and complete a dive for that specific course. The dives could be with my instructors or without... they were perfectly willing to take my word for it and sign off on it later.

I got enough out of my OW class to know that I know just enough to be dangerous to myself if I am not careful. I choose to pull out my books every once in a while and go thru them again, but I too would grumble and have to say that re-certification would not do so much to help the diver as it would the dive shops line their pockets. If anybody should be regulated, the instructors and operators should be. Even then, my ultimate vote would be towards natural selection. The information is out there available to anyone. I would say I have got more practical advice from dive buddies and this forum than any of the instructors I went thru.