In the given situation, X is a graduate of a Bachelor in Science course who wanted to

pursue medicine but failed to do so because he failed the exam three times. The NMAT, or
National Medical Admission Test, is a standardized test to select applicants to be admitted to
Philippine medical schools. This test is very crucial since it only selects students who are
qualified to enter medical school. It is a mandatory exam that needs to be taken before one is
admitted to medical school. According to the test’s policy and the DepEd guideline, a test taker
can only take up to a maximum of 3 attempts; after that, the student will no longer be allowed
to take the exam for the fourth time. In X’s case, he already took it three times, but he sadly
failed, thus, he is now arguing with the regulating body because of the rule.

I would agree with the rule of the regulating body because medical school is a very
serious matter since people’s lives are at stake. The lives of the people are literally in your
hands, and one wrong move can kill the person. Also, in the argument of X, he stated that the
rule snatched his freedom to be the best person he can be, but he was already given three
chances to be able to pass the exam, but sadly, he failed all of them. He was already given three
opportunities to be the best person he could be, but he did not do it well. The field of medicine
is a crucial field because, as a doctor in the medical area, the patient’s life is at stake, there is no
room for failure and mistakes in the field since if a doctor makes one wrong move, it could
jeopardize their patient’s life, and also their career. In the case of X, failing the entrance exam
three times implies that he was not able to do his best in the exams, and even if he was given
three chances, he managed to fail all of them. Also, as a person, it can be quite alarming to be
treated by someone who failed their exam three times, especially since in the medical field, one
must be expertise in their job and must know well enough to treat their patients properly.

In conclusion, even if X tried to argue that his freedom to study is violated by the exam,
he must know how to respect the policies and rules that were implemented because they were
there for a reason. The NMAT was created to select applicants who were truly suitable to enter
medical schools. X was already given three chances at the exams, enough to prove that he was
suitable for medical school, but sadly, he did not. Thus, the rule did not violate his freedom to
study because there is always a limitation to everything, and since he is trying to enter medical
school, the rules are stricter since people’s lives are at stake.