In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas for a few years, but others think everyone should be free to choose where they work. Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.

The well-established civil facilities in cities are one of the key contributing factors to the rural-urban shift. However, people have different opinions regarding whether these inexperienced teachers and doctors should work in the rural areas. In this essay, both sides will be examined. On one hand, educational and medical workers are able to enhance their working skills significantly compared to those who stay in cities. Because it is human nature to stimulate their potentials under a poor condition. For example, our ancestors learnt how to use fire and stone to strike beasts in the stone-age. However, one problem associated with this phenomenon is that people who have lived in the remote areas for a long period of time may have problems in reintegrating into the city lifestyle. Consequently, what would happen is that they might be unable to get used to the cut-throat competition that undermines confidence and working passion. On the other hand, everyone should respect the fact that individuals are entitled to do anything they want. In contrast, if medical workers are sent to a distant place against their will, perhaps they could become less productive, showing a negative attitude towards career. Nevertheless, when it comes to the freedom of personal choice, people need to consider the influence of their behaviours. If all teachers opt to work in the city schools, then the education quality at the other side of the mountain would become cumbersome. Needless to say, the gap between urban and rural places would not be diminished To conclude, I believe that young teachers and doctors should be sent to rural places for the sake of their personal prospects. However, we shall not forget that the final choice is given to them