Q11 - Compared to nonprofit hospitals

[WaltGrace1983]

This is a weaken question.

Investor-owned hospitals require less public investment, use fewer employees, and have higher occupancy levels
→
Investor-owned hospitals are better than nonprofit hospitals for delivering medical care

Since this is a weaken the conclusion question, I know that I might not need to necessarily use the information in the premises in the argument but rather I may just have to show how non-profits are actually better regardless of the information provided. However, I am also thinking, "so what if these things are true? They don't necessarily mean anything for medical care. These things - less employees, less investment, and more occupants - might actually be bad for hospitals rather than good for them. I would much rather go to a hospital with more employees, less occupants, and additional sources of funding!

(A) May strengthen, but just a tiny bit. While, yea, this does show how investor-owned hospitals might be a bit better (they are cheaper). However, this doesn't necessarily mean that it is a better way of delivering medical care. Even if the investor-owned hospitals were more expensive, this doesn't necessarily mean that it is not a better place to go to for medical care! Remember: we aren't talking about which hospital is better in general. We are talking about which hospital is better for medical care.

(B) This is a definite weakener of the argument's conclusion. If patients at nonprofits recover faster, this shows a bit how nonprofits might be better for medical care! After all, a speedier recovery seems to be analogous with better care. One thing to note about this one though: notice how this answer choice is talking about "patients with comparable illnesses." If this answer choice didn't add this little addendum, it would be a MUCH weaker answer choice and perhaps not even the correct answer. Why? Because we could just as easily say, "well patients at investor owned hospitals are actually sicker so it would make sense that patients at nonprofit hospitals recover faster!" That little addendum saying that both hospitals have different rates of recovery for analogous illnesses is very important!

(C), (D), and (E) function similarly. They show why nonprofits might be a better overall because they raise more funds, their doctors earn higher salaries, they receive more donations, etc. However, we are still looking for the answer that talks about medical care. This is hugely important and to pick an answer that doesn't talk about medical care is to pick an answer that doesn't address the task. The task is simple: weaken the argument that investor-owned hospitals are a better way of delivering medical care than are nonprofit hospitals. (C) (D) and (E) fail to relate those good things to medical care and that is why they are all wrong.