but how can you campaign for less training
IMHO, the answer (at least for some) may be more training. I have long been an advocate of the idea that most pilots should train for an instrument rating. In addition to improving ones chances of a successful outcome in an IIMC encounter, the discipline required carries over into all other aspects of flying.
A recent experience drove this home (again). In a B407 recurrent training course the instructor announced in the preflight briefing for an FTD (Frasca Level 6) session that he would give me a scenario (a short trip) to fly and that somewhere enroute he would give me an IIMC situation that could not be corrected with a 180 deg turn. Furthermore, he stated that the entire area would go to low IFR and I would have to fly to an airport with an ILS and fly the approach. Gulp! During the initial part of the "trip" he introduced a few failures while still VMC which,in part, were designed to direct my attention away from the upcoming IIMC encounter. The IMC weather occurred suddenly and required flying for about 40 minutes in hard IMC before reaching the airport and flying the ILS to near minimums.
This worked out without calamity, but my heart rate was definitely elevated! I have an IR but am years out of currency. IMO, a pilot with only the minimum training could not have survived. Even with an IR, an unstabilized helicopter is no place to be in IMC, but one's odds of survival would seem to be greatly enhanced. I have recently installed a Cobham HeliSAS system in my helicopter. While not nearly as sophicticated as an SPIFR approved helicopter autopilot, it is cabable of flying a coupled approach with vertical guidance (ILS/LNAV-VNAV/LPV). It does this quite well and could well save the day in an IIMC situation. However, staying out of IMC is by far the best solution.