These are the essays I wrote while taking the MGMATs-
|AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Argument|
|The following appeared in a medical magazine:”Art and music have long been understood to have therapeutic effects for individuals who suffer from either physical or mental illnesses. However, most doctors rarely recommend to patients some form of art or music therapy. Instead, doctors focus almost all of their attention on costly drug treatments and invasive procedures that carry serious risks and side-effects. By focusing on these expensive procedures rather than low-cost treatments such as art and music therapy, doctors are doing a disservice to their patients and contributing to the rising cost of health care in the United States.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument’s logic and analyze the argument’s underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument’s conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
|The argument says that doctors don’t recommend any form of art or music therapy and hence do a disservice to their patients. The author concludes this from the fact that art and music are known to have a therapeutic effect on individuals. There is no quantifiable benefit of art and music. It may be the case that art and music helps a patient forget about the pain and hence create a feeling of well being. The treatment of serious ailments cannot be based completely on the therapeutic effects of art and music as they don’t guarantee a recovery.For example, music may soothe a cancer patient undergoing chemotherapy. But this doesn’t mean that chemotherapy can be replaced by music and art. Ailments which call for invasive procedures are usually demand those procedures. Such serious ailments can’t be treated by art and music.
Also, doctors are responsible and liable for the treatments they prescribe. Since, art and music don’t have any proven effect, it doesn’t make sense for a doctor to include them in a formal prescription. These are the things that should be taken care of by the hospital administrators and the families of the patients. This becomes all the more important as all patients may not enjoy the same type of music or the same form of art. A doctor’s job is to treat a patient physically, not aesthetically using art and music. Hence, concluding that doctors are doing a disservice to their patients, by sticking to convectional and medically approved forms of treatment, is inappropriate.
Also, art and music can be more effective in mental illnesses than they are in physical illnesses. Suggesting art and music as a form of treatment is more suitable for a psychiatrist treating a patient for depression. Other physical ailments and injuries can’t depend upon music and art for treatment.
In conclusion, it may be said that the author has used faulty logic to conclude that the doctors are doing a disservice. Including some information about results of studies conducted on the therapeutic effect of art and music may help strengthen the argument.