Q7 - The clinic administrator responds

[cyruswhittaker]

Can you please explain question 7? I'm still having difficulty fully understanding how the use of the word "patients" undermines the assumption (answer E).

[lisahollchang]

Actually I had a problem with this question too. It's in PT 28, not PT29. Looking forward to some help! Thanks!

[cyruswhittaker]

Yes, it is in preptest 28, not 29.

I feel like I have a vague understanding of why it's correct. The clinic administrator seems to use patients as those who are not yet diagnosed while the auditor uses it to reference current patients who have already been diagnosed. So by using the word patients in a different context, the administrator appears to be undermining the assumption?

It's still unclear to me, however, so any clarification would be very helpful.

[tianfeng102]

Yes, it is in preptest 28, not 29.

I feel like I have a vague understanding of why it's correct. The clinic administrator seems to use patients as those who are not yet diagnosed while the auditor uses it to reference current patients who have already been diagnosed. So by using the word patients in a different context, the administrator appears to be undermining the assumption?

It's still unclear to me, however, so any clarification would be very helpful.

I think you are on the right track.

The term "patient" in the eyes of Hospital auditor refers to those people who have been diagnosed of neurological diseases and who are suffering from the disorders. But according to the clinic administrator, the term "patient" includes those people would develop those disorders in the future, whose suffering therefrom might be lessened due to the ongoing research. In short, the administrator is trying to broaden the definition in order to justify the allocation of the funds.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I'd agree with tianfeng102.

The clinic administrator is broadening the definition of the term "patient" to include those people who have not yet been diagnosed with the disorder. Those people who have not yet been diagnosed would not qualify under the auditor's definition of "patient" but would qualify under the clinic administrator's.

Great work tianfeng102!

[sr]

I didn't see it as merely broadening the definition. I saw it as something else.

The auditor thinks the funds need to be used to alleviate suffering. The administrator is considering research toward finding new ways to alleviate suffering, as alleviating suffering itself. There is a distinction. There is a difference between actually alleviating suffering, and finding ways to alleviate suffering. The second action is not actually alleviating suffering it is finding ways to do it.

For example there is a difference between sneaking out of your house, and researching ways to sneak out. If you are doing the second, what you're doing does not actually constitute sneaking out just yet.

So I think what is being broadened is the term alleviating suffering, not the term patients.

[harrison41]

I agree with the last poster. Since the correct answer choice refers to a "phrase" being broadened, and not just a single "term," I think the phrase being referred to is "that the funds...all be used to minimize patients' suffering." The hospital auditor interprets this phrase as meaning that the money must go directly to patients, while the clinic administrator interprets it as meaning that the money could be used indirectly (i.e. through related research) to minimize patient suffering and so would not be a violation.

[timmydoeslsat]

I would state that the key phrase is "minimize patient suffering."

The auditor certainly has an assumption regarding how to minimize patient suffering. He is obviously assuming that spending money on research for new diagnostic technologies does not constitute minimizing patient suffering.

The administrator demonstrates that funding into these technologies can minimize patient suffering.

[carly.applebaum]

why is D wrong? it seems like the clinic admin is saying that even though this is a violation, the reasoning behind funding technologies allows for a better long-term result. and thus, "the reasoning motivating the violation needs to be considered".

what is the "key phrase" that E is referring to? and what is the assumption that is undermined?

thanks!

[timmydoeslsat]

why is D wrong? it seems like the clinic admin is saying that even though this is a violation, the reasoning behind funding technologies allows for a better long-term result. and thus, "the reasoning motivating the violation needs to be considered".

what is the "key phrase" that E is referring to? and what is the assumption that is undermined?

thanks!

The clinic admin does not think there is a violation. The hospital auditor stated that the funds were to be used to minimize patients suffering. The clinic admin is showing how those funds are achieving the goal even though it is not being spent directly on patients, but rather on research. The assumption of the hospital auditor is that money being spent on something other than directly on patients is not considered able to minimize patients suffering.

[monygg85]

I got this by process of elimination. Other answers were off, and I couldnt find a reason to eliminate this one. I went back to see why its right. I have to agree with the above posters and more specifically timmydoeslsat. It says "key phrase" so I immediately started looking for more than one word.

Minimizing patient suffering, new technology...stood out from the hospital auditors argument. But I dont know exactly why. I feel like the clinic administrator uses tangled up language to undermine the hospital auditors assumption that the new diagnostic technologies wont be minimizing patients' suffering.

Any help on this?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Sure! The hospital auditor claims that the funds need to be used to minimize patient suffering and points out that one fifth of the money is being spent on diagnostic technologies. The hospital auditor assumes that new diagnostic technologies do not minimize patient suffering.

The hospital administrator expands the scope of what is included in minimizing patient suffering to include diagnostic technologies.

Hope that helps!

[Alvanith]

I would go with timmy that the key phrase is "to minimize patients' suffering" rather than the single term "patients."

Both auditor and administrator could mean the "patients" is referring to the people who are diagnosed of the neurological disorders, with the only difference whether the treatment is in early stages, since logically a person receives a treatment after he/she has already been diagnosed.

The auditor assumes that to minimize is to spend the money directly on patients, but the administrator thinks the funds could be used indirectly to minimize the suffering by researching for early diagnosis.