Some people believed that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they shouuld be free to work in another country if they wish. Discuss both viewes and give your opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Some people argue that doctors and engineers should be required to work in the country where they qualified,

while

Linking Words

others believe they should be free to take jobs abroad for higher pay, safer workplaces, or better training. I support mobility, because forced retention rarely fixes why people leave. Still, when training is heavily subsidised, a time-limited obligation is reasonable. Supporters of compulsory local work focus on fairness and capacity. Professional training is expensive, and taxpayers often fund university places, teaching hospitals, and supervised placements. If graduates depart straight away, the public sector loses staff and its investment.

This

Linking Words

is felt most in remote areas: when a district hospital cannot replace a junior doctor, clinic lines stretch, referrals pile up, and emergency cover becomes fragile.

Likewise

Linking Words

, losing engineers slows infrastructure projects and weakens safety oversight on sites and in procurement.

However

Linking Words

, strict restrictions can backfire. Many professionals migrate because the job is hard to do well: hospitals may lack equipment and safe staffing,

while

Linking Words

engineering roles may involve weak project governance, low pay, and limited mentoring. In field postings, morale drops quickly when targets stay high but resources do not, so compulsory placement feels like punishment rather than service. Bans

also

Linking Words

encourage avoidance, with some students choosing overseas study from the start. Mobility can raise skills too: doctors can train in better-equipped hospitals and return,

while

Linking Words

engineers bring back modern standards. Even those who stay overseas often support families through remittances and partnerships. In conclusion, compulsory service may plug urgent gaps, but it cannot replace reform. Professionals should be free to work abroad, backed by fair two-to-four-year bonds or repayment options and better local conditions.