HealthOpinion (Agree / Disagree)
IELTS Essay: Prevention vs Treatment Spending (Band 9 vs 6.5)
In short
Below is a full Band 9 model answer to this IELTS Writing Task 2 question, the same question written at Band 6.5, and a criterion-by-criterion breakdown of exactly what separates them — so you can see what to change in your own writing. Then check your essay with the free tool.
The question
Some people believe that governments should spend more money on preventing illness than on treating those who are already ill. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
How to approach a Opinion (Agree / Disagree) question
For an agree/disagree question, decide your position before you write and make it unmistakable in the introduction. You can fully agree, fully disagree, or partially agree — all are fine — but you must then defend that single position consistently across both body paragraphs. The most common Task Response error here is sitting on the fence: giving arguments for both sides without ever committing to a view.
The plan
- 01Introduction: paraphrase the topic and state a clear position agreeing that prevention should receive the larger share of funding.
- 02Body 1: argue prevention is more cost-effective, since vaccination, screening and health campaigns intercept costly chronic disease early.
- 03Body 2: concede that the ill cannot be neglected, then show prevention and treatment are complementary and the balance should favour prevention.
- 04Conclusion: restate that governments should prioritise prevention as the more humane and financially sustainable option.
Band 9 model answer
It is often argued that public health budgets would be better directed towards stopping people from becoming ill in the first place, rather than funding the treatment of existing patients. I broadly agree with this view, because prevention tackles the underlying causes of poor health and ultimately relieves the pressure on overstretched medical services.
The most compelling case for prioritising prevention is economic. Chronic conditions such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease absorb an enormous proportion of national health spending, yet many of them are avoidable. When governments invest in vaccination programmes, cancer screening and campaigns that discourage smoking or promote exercise, they intercept disease before it becomes entrenched and expensive. A modest sum spent on public education about diet, for instance, can spare the state the far greater cost of lifelong hospital care, making prevention a shrewd long-term investment rather than a soft option.
Critics reasonably point out that patients who are already suffering cannot simply be abandoned, and no responsible government would divert every penny away from hospitals and surgeries. This is a fair concern, but it does not undermine the central argument. Preventive measures and curative care are not mutually exclusive; rather, a stronger emphasis on the former gradually reduces the number of people who need the latter, freeing resources over time. The choice is therefore one of proportion, and the balance should tilt decisively towards keeping populations healthy.
In conclusion, while treatment must always remain available to those in need, I firmly believe that governments should allocate the larger share of their resources to prevention. Doing so is both more humane and more financially sustainable, as it addresses ill health at its source instead of merely managing its consequences.
The same question at Band 6.5
Nowadays health is a big problem in many countries. Some people think that government should spend more money for preventing the illness than treat the people who are already sick. In my opinion I agree with this idea and I will explain my reasons in this essay.
Firstly, prevention is very important because it can stop many disease before they happen. For example, if the government make more campaign about healthy food and doing exercise, people will be more healthy and they don't get sick easily. Also vaccination is a good way to prevent illness. If we prevent the illness, then less people go to hospital and this save a lot of money for the government. When people are healthy, they also feel happy and they can enjoy their life more.
Secondly, treating sick people is very expensive. When someone have a serious disease like cancer, the treatment cost a lot of money and take long time. This is a big burden for the health system. In many country the hospital is already very crowded and the doctors don't have enough time for every patient. So it is better to spend money before people become ill, because prevention is more cheaper than treatment. Also healthy people can work and help the economy of the country.
In conclusion, I think government should spend more money on prevention than treatment. Prevention can stop many illness and it is also cheaper. However treatment is still important for the people who are already sick, so the government should not forget about them. But prevention should be the first priority.
What separates them, criterion by criterion
| Criterion | Band 9 | Band 6.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Task Response | Takes an unambiguous position (prevention deserves the larger share) and handles the counter-argument, conceding that 'patients who are already suffering cannot simply be abandoned' before answering it. | Answers the question and agrees, but the ideas stay general and thin, mainly repeating that prevention is 'cheaper' and that healthy people 'can work'. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | Ideas build naturally with varied signposting ('The most compelling case...', 'Critics reasonably point out...', 'The choice is therefore...'). | Relies on mechanical linkers ('Firstly', 'Secondly', 'Also') and lists points rather than developing them. |
| Lexical Resource | Uses precise collocation such as 'overstretched medical services', 'intercept disease before it becomes entrenched' and 'a shrewd long-term investment'. | Adequate but repetitive, reusing 'spend money', 'prevent the illness' and the error 'more cheaper'. |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | Wide range of accurate complex structures, e.g. 'Preventive measures and curative care are not mutually exclusive; rather, a stronger emphasis on the former...'. | Mostly simple and compound sentences with noticeable but non-impeding errors ('someone have', 'many disease', 'the government make'). |
Examiner's note
The Band 9 answer states an unambiguous position and sustains it, using precise phrases such as 'intercept disease before it becomes entrenched' and complex structures that never impede meaning, and it handles the counter-argument gracefully. The Band 6.5 response stays on topic and is easy to follow, but its ideas remain general, its cohesion leans on 'Firstly' and 'Secondly', and recurring errors like 'more cheaper' and 'someone have' keep it clearly below band 7.
Vocabulary from the Band 9 answer
| Word / phrase | Meaning |
|---|---|
| overstretched medical services | health systems that have too little capacity for the demand placed on them |
| underlying causes | the root reasons behind a problem, rather than its symptoms |
| chronic conditions | long-lasting illnesses that persist over many years |
| absorb a proportion of spending | use up a large share of a budget |
| intercept disease | stop an illness developing before it takes hold |
| a shrewd long-term investment | a wise use of money that pays off over time |
| mutually exclusive | unable to exist together, so choosing one rules out the other |
| financially sustainable | able to be maintained without running out of money |
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to fully agree or disagree, or can I take a balanced view?
Both are acceptable in an opinion essay, but whichever you choose, state it clearly in the introduction and keep it consistent throughout. A partial agreement is fine as long as your position never becomes vague.
How many words should a Task 2 essay be?
Write at least 250 words. There is no upper limit, but roughly 260 to 290 words is usually enough to develop two strong body paragraphs without padding.
Should I mention the opposing side in an opinion essay?
You do not have to, but acknowledging and then answering a counter-argument often strengthens your Task Response, as it shows you have considered the issue fully.