this is an interesting discussion. this is one of the many benefits of our national organization allowing us to use our collective voices to arrive at a consensus, and then do something about it. with all due respect to christopher carley's comments on this forum, i disagree with his viewpoint in item #1 of his post. in my opinion, this viewpoint is one reason why our profession is not compensated comparably to the legal and medical professions, both of which ARE thoroughly legislated. while i TOTALLY agree with item #2 of his comments, expanding on the legal requirements for architectural services must maintain high priority. in my state (texas) the engineers have had a practice act since 1937. our architectural practice act didn't become law until the 1980s. i think of it as a "minimum standard", similar to our building codes. as uncomfortable as it is for most architects, maintaining our profession's importance in our state legislatures by defending and expanding on practice acts, and watching out for other issues that regulate the practice of architecture are critical to maintaining our importance as a profession.
when i am sick, i have to see a physician to receive a prescription for medication. in order to receive the medication i must get it from a pharmacist. when i buy or sell property, i have to pay an attorney. legislation is a foundational requirement in order to avoid extinction. by no means is it a reason why we practice architecture, but i believe it to be foundational to the profession and its future.
-------------------------------------------
Darren Heine AIA
Architect
BBA Architects, LP
Brenham TX
-------------------------------------------