Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D.

Question

Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D. programs, in which they receive both medical and law degrees at the conclusion of their studies. But since medical students primarily earn their law degree in order to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits as doctors, we must still conclude that they are primarily doctors, and not lawyers.

Which of the following is an assumption that supports drawing the conclusion above from the reason given?

A. Some students who complete such joint programs choose to become lawyers in fields in which they do not use their medical training, while those who choose to become doctors do use legal training.

B. Certain recipients of these joint degrees are not any less diligent than others in the legal courses that they take, with notable exceptions.

C. If such joint degrees required that students focus more on their legal studies than their medical studies, students could be considered lawyers after graduation.

D. A person cannot be considered a lawyer if he or she received a law degree for purposes other than practicing the law.

E. Medical students, in doing extensive lab work, get much more practical experience about their future field than law students get about practicing law.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Data Insights Butler

ajay0520 · Answer

conclusion: medical students earn their law degree to protect themself so they should not be considered lawyer. here the assumption made by author should be something that says anyone who do not practice for other should not be considered lawyer.
A: looks irrevelant
B: same it doesnt affect conclusion
C: irrelevent 
D: is the correct answer.
E:irrelevent

Gmat750aspirant · Answer

Step 1: Identify the argument and conclusion 
- Premise: Many medical students enroll in joint M.D./J.D. programs and earn both medical and law degrees. 
- Premise: These students primarily earn their law degrees to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits. 
- Conclusion: These students should still be considered doctors, not lawyers.

Step 2: Identify the assumption 
The argument assumes that a person’s primary designation (doctor vs. lawyer) depends on the reason they pursued their degree, rather than simply having the degree. The assumption must support the idea that earning a law degree for reasons other than practicing law means they are not actually lawyers.

Step 3: Evaluate the answer choices

(A) Some joint-degree students become lawyers in unrelated fields, while doctors still use their legal knowledge. 
- Irrelevant. This does not support the argument that their primary identity is as doctors.

(B) Some joint-degree students are diligent in their legal studies. 
- Irrelevant. The argument does not depend on how hard they study law.

(C) If students focused more on law than medicine, they could be considered lawyers. 
- This is a hypothetical scenario, not an assumption that directly supports the argument.

(D) A person cannot be considered a lawyer if they got a law degree for purposes other than practicing law. 
- Correct. This directly supports the argument’s reasoning that because these students earned law degrees only to protect themselves, they are not actually lawyers.

(E) Medical students get more practical experience in their field than law students do. 
- Irrelevant. The argument does not compare the practical experience of doctors and lawyers.

Conclusion 
Answer: D

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Our conclusion here is helpfully signaled by the word “conclude”: these graduates are doctors, not lawyers. Why? Because the students view their medical studies as primary and their legal studies as secondary. To link one idea to the other, we have to make the assumption that people who study the law, but do not intend to practice it, are not lawyers--the assumption presented in (D).

The fact that certain students might be exceptions to the rule of prioritizing medical studies (A) doesn’t help us, and is not necessary to make the leap between how students view their legal studies and their subsequent professional titles. The added information that the doctors use legal training, but the lawyers do not use medical training, is unnecessary details that doesn’t help us identify the assumption.

The argument is made on the basis of what students primarily do after graduation. Because of this, their performance in their legal courses is actually irrelevant to this argument (B). They could be awesome, they could be awful--all that matters in this passage is what they do afterward.

Similarly, (C) focuses on the courses that students take, and not on the careers that they choose to pursue after obtaining their degrees. It can’t be our assumption, as this statement concerns what happens before, not after, graduation.

Finally, (E) also prioritizes the pre-graduation phase of the degrees, with a suggestion about gaining experience in the field. While this might be helpful for the individual students, it’s not of any help in identifying the assumption here about whom can be called lawyers, and so it is not the correct answer.

ManifestMBAbay25 · Answer

A. Some students who complete such joint programs choose to become lawyers in fields in which they do not use their medical training, while those who choose to become doctors do use legal training.  Incorrect

B. Certain recipients of these joint degrees are not any less diligent than others in the legal courses that they take, with notable exceptions. -  Incorrect

C. If such joint degrees required that students focus more on their legal studies than their medical studies, students could be considered lawyers after graduation.  Incorrect

D. A person cannot be considered a lawyer if he or she received a law degree for purposes other than practicing the law. - This is required assumption for the conclusion.  Correct

E. Medical students, in doing extensive lab work, get much more practical experience about their future field than law students get about practicing law.  Incorrect

Shrutika02 · Answer

Hi, doesn't C cover a bigger bracket of "all who persue law for different reasons", it can be beyond doctors. Also if someone drops mid way with just the law degree and no doctorate, they would be more lawyer than doctors. Shouldn't it be down to the fact that they do not get to be lawyers because they have not practiced it ever?

egmat · Answer

Hi Shrutika02,

You're chasing two different things here, so let me take them one at a time, because both actually point back to why  D  is the assumption.

On your "not practiced it ever" point - that's exactly what D says.

Look at the wording:  "A person cannot be considered a lawyer if he or she received a law degree for purposes other than practicing the law."  The argument's only reason is that these students earned the law degree  to protect themselves from malpractice  - i.e.,  not to practice law . D is the bridge that turns "didn't get it to practice law" into "isn't a lawyer." So your instinct is correct; D is just the formal version of it.

On C - bigger scope doesn't make it the assumption.

C reads:  "If such joint degrees required that students focus more on their legal studies... students could be considered lawyers."  Two problems:

- It's about the  opposite scenario  (focusing  more  on law), and it's about  course focus before graduation , not the after-graduation identity the conclusion is about.
- Logically it runs the wrong way. "If more-law-focus → could be a lawyer" tells you  nothing  about students who focus on medicine. You can't flip it to "medicine-focus → not a lawyer." An assumption has to support  this  conclusion from  this  reason - C never touches that link.

Wider scope only helps if the choice actually connects the given reason to the conclusion. C covers more ground but none of it is the ground we need.

Quick test of that flip:

- "If it rains, the ground gets wet." Does that tell you the ground is  dry  whenever it doesn't rain? No.
- C has the same shape - that's why it can't be the assumption, while D, which speaks directly to  purpose , can.

And the "drops out midway" idea is an outside scenario - the argument only discusses students who  complete  the joint program, so we judge only that group.

Answer: D

Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D.

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D.

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards