The following sentences are taken from the story titled" sales of kidneys prompt new laws and debate". and i have questions about several sentences whose meaning is difficult for me to understand.
1.The altruistic ' gift relationship ' may be inadequate as a motivator and an anachronism in medicine today. What does it mean exactly by gift relationship?
2. If paying seems wrong, it may nevertheless be preferable to accepting the suffering and death of patiens. Here what is the function of nevertheless and what does it mean by be preferable to accepting...?
3. A doctor said he attempted to find out if the doner had been paid by waving a 5-pound note at him. what does it mean by waving a 5-poun dnote at him?
4.what possible objection can there be if one person , of their own free will, should sell their kidny to someone else. Here what is the exact of meaning of ?is it similar to have to or must ? or does it have any other meaning?
I find if i understand should as have to , the whole sentence sounds awkward. what do you think?
5. while there is a shortage of kidneys, i do not see why it is wrong for you to do what you will with your body. Here the phrase... what you will with your body" is grammaticallly acceptable? I think some verb should be follwed after will because what you will is not complete. what do you think
1- I presume it refers to the donation of organs rather than the sale.
2- It shows that the author wants to argue the idea of paying being wrong. Buying organs is possibly preferable to watching a patient die.
3- Presumably, tghe doctor didn't speak the language of the donor, so showed him some money to try to see if he had been paid to donate.
4- should sell = chooses to sell
5what you will = what you want