#5 - Concept Reference, Must Be True, Except

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=11403)

The correct answer choice is (D)

The passage never associates daycare’s limitations with vacations. Vacations are discussed prior to daycare.

[jessamynlockard]

Yes, but of the answer choices, A seemed like one of those things was not like the other. Also, could "vacations" in D be interpreted as family vacations? How are we supposed to avoid extending our understanding of "vacations" in line 5 (effecting childcare) as not having implications on daycare?

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi Jessa,

A seemed like one of those things was not like the other.

This way of approaching except questions is a flawed strategy. An author may list three reasons for a theory or argument that sound very similar to each other, and one that stands out as different. We simply can't assume that when an author lists four reasons or examples, that they must be like one another.

"Vacations" in answer choice (D) could refer to family vacations, school vacations, or any other type of vacation you can reasonably apply the statement to. The question is whether the author mentioned school vacations in line 5 (or another type of vacation elsewhere) to argue against day care as a perfect solution to the pressures associated with child rearing.

The second sentence of the passage serves to illustrate that parents have a problem with taking care of children at times. The first half of the sentence tells us that preschool-age children need constant care, and the second half of the sentence tells us two times that school-age children need care: after school and during school vacations.

These are the scheduling conflicts that the following sentence alludes to when the author tells us that day-care services can help in some circumstances. So you should understand vacations as having implications on day-care, but the author is not using it as an example of the limitation of day-care. Rather this is the problem that day-cares "can resolve."

[Coleman]

I have a question about the wording of the answer choice A.
It states "Even the best daycare available cannot GUARANTEE that children will have meaningful time with their parents." I don't understand what this statement intended to say.
Based on the passage, (line 10) children need more than tending; they also need meaningful time with their parents. Perhaps, because daycare is still not enough to replace the quality time children can spend with their parents. However, I don't understand the term "guarantee" here to describe the relationship between the fact that child being at best available daycare and the expectation they will have meaningful time with parents.
Why one should guarantee the other? What is the main takeaway from the answer choice A?

Any clarification will be much appreciated! Thank you.

[Adam Tyson]

If daycare cannot guarantee that children will have meaningful time with parents, and if meaningful time with parents is necessary, that suggests one reason why daycare is not a complete "solution to the pressures associated with child rearing." It is unable to adequately address a crucial issue faced by those parents. It has nothing to do with whether daycare should make such a guarantee. It's just that because it does not provide that guarantee, it cannot solve every problem for parents.

[aghartism]

While I'm sympathetic to the reasons given for favoring (D) over (A), and, indeed, I initially selected (D) before switching to (A), I still think the word choice of option (A) is somewhat strange, and would be interested in the opinions of the others.

The passage says:

...workers cannot always find or afford suitable [day]care. Even when they obtain such care, parents must still cope with emergencies...Moreover, children need more than tending; they also need meaningful time with their parents. (Emphasis added)

As my added emphasis should suggest, I think the sentence beginning with "Moreover" is in reference to suitable daycare. It's hard for me to see how the passage is suggesting something about the best day care available. The passage seems to me only to make a claim about suitable day care; it is consistent with the passage that the best available day care is so good that parents need not worry about emergencies and is such that it guarantees children will have meaningful time with their parents. (Of course, such excellent daycare need not be affordable, just available.)

My question, then, is: what to makes of lapses like these in the phrasing of answer choices?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi aghartism,

First, I think it's excellent that you picked up on the difference between "suitable day-care" in the passage and "even the best day-care" in Answer A, and there are many times when that difference will be critical to choosing the correct answer. It turns out not to make a real difference in this particular question, however.

Stepping back from the details for second, let's focus on the big picture of the passage for context. The author is complaining that the inflexibility of traditional work schedules harms working parents, especially mothers. In that context, the author brings up day-care as a partial solution, but not a complete solution. The author writes "although day care can resolve some scheduling conflicts between home and office" (lines 5-6) and then continues on to list the problems and limitations of day-care.

The statement about "children need more than tending, they also need meaningful time with their parents" (lines 10-12) is to be understood as a problem/limitation of day-care itself, not just "suitable" day-care, but "even the best day-care." The author's point is that no matter how "good" a day-care is, it cannot by definition provide children with meaningful time with their parents. Basically, unless the day-care can somehow get the parent out of work (maybe by writing a note to their boss?), it cannot provide meaningful parent/child time because the parent is still at work all day (and possibly into the night) and not with their child.

Another way to consider the idea is that if there were some "super" day-care that could actually provide meaningful time with parents, then that would be a viable solution for some parents, but the passage is stating that day-care is a partial solution at best; it's better than nothing, but hardly ideal by itself.

[aghartism]

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the response.

I have a new perspective on this part of the passage:

"Even when they obtain [suitable] care, parents must still cope with emergencies...Moreover, children need more than tending; they also need meaningful time with their parents."

Even if the author is thinking about suitable care in the second sentence (as my initial post complained), the best possible care is presumably suitable care, so the limitations would apply to it as well! That is, if all suitable care "must" have a limitation, then even the best possible care would, too. It makes perfect sense now.

I can't believe I didn't think of it that way before.