متن اصلی نمونه

Introduction
Skilled professionals are vital for a country’s development. While some argue that doctors and engineers should work where they were trained, others believe they should be free to work abroad. This essay will discuss both views and give my opinion.

Body Paragraph 1 – Required to Stay
On the one hand, many believe that professionals trained domestically have a duty to serve their own country. Governments often invest large sums in subsidising medical and engineering education, and taxpayers expect a return on that investment. For instance, several countries require medical graduates to work in local hospitals for a few years in exchange for lower tuition fees. Supporters argue that this policy ensures a stable workforce and prevents shortages of skilled personnel, especially in rural or underserved areas.

Body Paragraph 2 – Free to Work Anywhere
On the other hand, others argue that restricting professionals’ movement limits personal freedom and can discourage talented individuals from entering these fields. Many professionals fund part of their education themselves and wish to choose where to live and work. For example, engineers often relocate abroad to gain experience with advanced technology or to improve their family’s living standards. Advocates of this view claim that allowing free movement benefits all countries by encouraging global knowledge exchange and innovation.

Conclusion
In conclusion, mandatory service helps retain talent, while freedom of movement respects individual choice. I believe professionals should decide where to work, though governments can use incentives such as scholarships or loan forgiveness to encourage them to contribute to their home country.