No, this is not the better argument, although it has not always been so. Until recently, the courts followed the approach in Cook v Cook (1986) 162 CLR 376, and took account of a defendant's individual lack of experience or qualification to determine the standard of care owed to a plaintiff.
However, in Imbree v McNeilly; McNeilly v Imbree (2008) 236 CLR 510 the High Court disapproved this approach, stating that the standard of care owed by an adult is to be judged objectively without reference to the individual defendant's lack of experience or qualification.