I heard a thought leader, a friend, take issue with adoption of the CDC Model Aquatic Health Code (MAHC) since it’s being positioned as an “evolution” in design and operations rather than a needed “revolution.”
Half of the United States is not united on requiring that the person operating the public pool have any verifiable training. Designers, architects, engineers and builders create pools that minimize risk, but if they are driven by uneducated operators, then the kids playing in the pool are at greater risk.
Like many "mass" phenomena, they can be represented by a bell curve (normal distribution). On one end are fabulous state of the art facilities that are ideal to protect against acute illness (RWIs) and against chronic illness (DPBs). On the other end of the bell curve are cesspools disguised as swimming pools with dated engineering and ignorant operations. What seems "evolutionary" to a leader is “revolutionary” to the low end of the bell curve.
Don't be discouraged by the word or thought of "evolution" versus "revolution." Which end of the bell curve poses the greatest risk to people? If a MAHC is adopted and it raises the bar a little for the top half of the bell curve and a lot for the bottom half of the bell curve, wouldn’t that be a good thing? If you agree with my logic, then become a champion for adoption of the MAHC.
What we have been doing, has not been working. Having 80-90+ codes around the country is a fabulous waste of time for government, industry, and aquatic facilities. Having operators with no verifiable training is reckless. A MAHC unadopted is a MAHC undone. A MAHC unadopted is a future undone. Help get it adopted. It will be the best kind of revolution, one that can evolve.
Republished from the NSPF Blog
