Brent’s Blog

Putting it out there

“Designing Freedom”, tea parties, strategies, the beat goes on. . .

[read comments below]

Good reading from the IDPC (Interior Design Protection Council) , July 1, 2008 Newsletter
“PROJECT: DESIGNING FREEDOM as we defend our rights to occupational freedom and free speech!”

(Brent comment: ASID and IIDA may think this is bunk, that you better get in line to take their exam and become licensed or just prepare to fold up your tent, but as long as America is still a democracy, and citizens have rights, interior designers should not stand down and get trampled on. This is not to say that I am against design education, experience and being tested, if need be, but using the state to stomp out competition is DEAD WRONG and there are other ways to be MORE PROFESSIONAL without putting thousands of perfectly fine designers or decorators out of business. )

July 2, 2008 - Posted by brentwilliams | Stupid Legislation | , , | 2 Comments

2 Comments »

  1. Brent,
    I wish that you would really read the actual Bill SB1312 language…although the number for the bill is dead, the language is not. If you truly read the language, you will see that the bill is not trying to stop anyone from doing what they are legally doing today. Rather, the bill is attempting to give those designers that MUST submit their projects/documents for plan check approval and permit, that they can do so directly by becoming a registered interior designer.

    It’s a very simple goal but an extremely misunderstood one.

    Comment by Susanne Molina | July 2, 2008 | Reply

  2. Here’s an interesting paragraph from IDPC’s website from attacks on SB1312…

    “SB 1312 discriminates against the mentally ill. Being declared “mentally ill” by a “court of competent jurisdiction” would be grounds for a registered interior designer to lose her certificate of registration or to be denied registration in the first place – clearly, whether she’d done anything wrong or not. Theoretically, this could include people with depression, bipolar disorder, and other mood disorders, anxiety disorders, narcissism, eating disorders, PTSD, ADHD, autism, sleep disorders, and even homosexuality and gender dysphoria, among a wide number of very common disorders presently considered to be “mental illness” by the psychiatric community. We could hope that everyone but the most seriously ill – and overtly dangerous – people would be protected, but the language in the bill is far too vague and all-encompassing, which could readily open the door to unchecked abuse of this provision”

    Fortunately, CA bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Also, the DSM de-listed homosexuality as a mental disorder in the early 1970s.

    The language used in the bill is/was consistent with other California practice legislation in regards to mental status.

    Inflammatory language is always troublesome, so consider the source. If they’ll throw Homosexuals in with the “metally ill”, where will their next attack land?

    Comment by Greg Price | July 2, 2008 | Reply


Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »