Andrewcoleman
D) Congress never supplied the funding that would have been necessary to provide high-quality outpatient care to the newly-released patients.
It's crazy how actually knowing the history of this issue really helped you to prephrase the answers of which one was actually correct.
Is this a good strategy to continue with or should caution be exercised?
Hi Andrew
In this particular question, it is not necessary to know the history of the issue in order to identify the correct answer (I had no information about the issue before answering this question). If we were to analyze the stimulus, we find:
i) High quality outpatient care plays a bigger role in improving the quality of life of the mentally ill than confining them to institutions.
ii) Based on the above, Congress released 95% of mentally ill patients confined to institutions.
iii) This did not have the desired impact on the quality of their lives, which actually worsened.
From this, we can clearly gather that it is not
only releasing the mentally ill patients from institutions that improves their lives. It
must also be accompanied by good outpatient care. Since their quality of lives worsened we can infer that the requisite level of outpatient care did not follow.
The only answer option that presents such an explanation is (D).
In general, I would advise against bringing in outside / personal experience to any question on the GMAT. The test is given by people all over the world and it would lose its credibility if prior knowledge in any area provided an advantage to some test takers (which would mean lack of prior knowledge would disadvantage the others). Hence, all information required to answer a question will be given in the question itself. Using outside experience can also result in some bias which may result in one selecting an answer which, though true in the real world, does not fit into the context presented in the question.
Hope this helps.