(2008). The study measures public opinion concerning two scenarios: one in which the kidney donor is given a fixed financial compensation; and one in which the donor is provided with health insurance coverage for life. According to the findings of the study, "although almost half of the respondents (46%) were reluctant towards introducing a system with fixed compensation to increase the number of living kidney donors, still 25% of the general public reacted positively." (Kranenburg, 1039) This study would conduct a similar comparative discussion, but would expand the number of available options discussed and would use a different sample population, as discussed in the subsequent section. Subjects and Sampling Technique:

The subjects will be drawn from amongst nursing professionals working in randomly selected renal specialty facilities and wards. Initial contact will be made by phone with a Director of Nursing at selected facilities requesting participation. Those that agree will receive surveys to account for all members of a nursing staff. Respondents will receive a survey and self-addressed stamped envelope with which to submit the survey to the researchers.

Data Collection and Analysis:

The survey instrument would use a Likert Scale in order to measure the level of approval or disapproval of certain methods for courtship of live kidney donation. Here, respondents are offered a series of statements, sectioned according to proposed courtship methods. One section would concern courtship through the use of financial compensation. One section would concern courtship through the use of healthcare coverage benefits. One section would concern courtship through financial compensation in such developing nations as Iran or Pakistan. One section would concern courtship through emphasis on humanitarian goals. Each section would contain such statements as the following: "This method of living donor courtship concurs with my ethical beliefs," "This method of living donor courtship is practical," and "This method of living donor courtship will help to save lives." Respondents will be instructed...

For instance, comparative analysis could accommodate a consideration of the raw scores produced for each of the four methods of courtship cited. These could be considered indicative of the composite benefits of each method where ethical, practical and medical components are all concerned. Likewise, scores would allow for the internal analysis of different proposed methods, which can be characterized as either lacking in practicality, medical usefulness or ethicality.
Treatment of Subjects:

Respondents are granted anonymity in both their response surveys and, consequently, in the presentation of findings. No nurse will be required or expected to pass a survey through any supervisor. No party beyond the researchers will be granted access to the survey responses. No list of names or biographical information will be requested of DoNs upon initiation of the research process.

Works Cited:

Conesa, C.; Rios, a.; Ramirez, P.; Sanchez, J.; Sanchez, E.; Rodriguez, M.; Martinez, L.; Ramos, F. & Parrilla, P. (2009). Attitude of Primary Care Nurses Toward Living Kidney Donation. Transplantation Proceedings, 37(9), 3626-3630.

Kranenburg, L.; Schram, a.; Zuidema, W.; Weimar, W.; Hilhorst, M.; Hessing, J. & Busschbach, J. (2008). Public Survey of Financial Incentives for Kidney Donation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 23(3), 1039-1042.

Neyhart, C. & Colaneri, J. (2004). Living Anonymous kidney donation: A solution to the organ donor shortage? Nephrology Nursing Journal. Online at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0ICF/is_3_31/ai_n17207253/

Watson, J. (2007). Theory of Human Caring: Theory Evolution. University of Colorado at Denver. Online at http://www.nursing.ucdenver.edu/faculty/jw_evolution.htm