MDMA, or methylene-dioxy-meth-amphetimine (Drugs.com) as it is chemically known, is an illegal Schedule 1 drug in the United States. It acts as a stimulant and a psychedlic that provides energy, confusion of time, and overall happiness with small matters. It has been known to give its users a great feeling of euphoria and empathy for all. Positive aspects of the drug have been know to have grand theraupeutic properties that allow users to relief the mental burden of depression, stress, and even as serious as post-traumatic stress disorder. Since it's theraupeutic properties were uncovered in the 1970's and its social and party influences were explored in the 1980's the drug has gained some attention from the government, science, medicine and recreational fields. From its healing properties of mental disaray to its excited, heart-throbbing, exhilerating, adrenaline fueled joy both doctors and ravers have a profound interest or captivation of this drug.

The illegality of this drug has allowed for a black market of unregulated doses being administered to the consumers. Interestingly enough one of the main dangers of MDMA use is the consumption of more harmful drugs or other substances that are portraying as MDMA. The few deaths that are caused by consumption or potential consumption of MDMA every year could easily be avoided if there were legal limitations set on what is suppose to be safe ecstasy.While an increase in convicts surges in the the 1980s because of the War on Drugs so does drug use. This harsh stance on a wrongly categorized drug is due to a lack of information of its true healing and therapeutic capabilities. This serves to ask if MDMA should become legal for recreational and medical so that safe use and effective treatment can be instilled. 

The drug's popularity has always drawn and interested many. This explains as to why youth culture, particularly the Electronic Dance Music scene, has always dealt with MDMA since the 1990's. Before it became illegal, pure to mostly pure doses of MDMA were distributed to consumers without any report of neurotoxicity and no lasting neuropsychological effects. (Sesa & Nutt) This is easily achieved through the responsible use of MDMA that should be universally known to any potential MDMA users. Small doses once every few months is the general rule to allow for serotonin and dopamine levels to replenish to their natural state.

Common misconceptions of MDMA include the myths of irreversible effects, peak in sexual drive, lost of brain cells, and an ultimate road to depression. What really needs to happen is a legalization of MDMA so that even more research can be conducted expeditiously to uncover more beneficial properties. With the increase of knowledge on the subject of MDMA comes the curriculum that could be advertised, warned, or instituted in the education of proper and safe MDMA usage. Absurd objections such as that MDMA usage causes holes to be burned into one's brain will be easily debunked and thoroughly explained as to why they are not true.

The prohibition for MDMA has caused a lucrative and dangerous black market to form, allowing unregulated and unsafe portrayals of MDMA to flood the market. MDMA usage has only increased since it's popularity flourished in the 1980's meaning that there has always been a steady consumer. Usage isn't decreasing by any means, Americans have to acknowledge the problem at hand and announce the fact that people aren't going to stop doing something all of the time just because it is illegal. Instead of punishing non-violent offenders the public should be educated on the truth of MDMA.

In a country where one out of five veterans who return from service suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, shouldn't this epidemic be treated thoroughly and properly. Unfortunately MDMA's therapeutic properties are being halted because the Drug Enforcement Agency in the 1980's claimed that there was no method of determining how reliable promising observations of MDMA were. A thirty year old claim has not been lifted or looked into since then but studies show that 83% of people who recieved MDMA-assisted psychotherapy in a study no longer met the criteria for post-traumatic stree disorder guidelines. (Treating PTSD with MDMA-Assisted Psychotherapy) 

Financially the country would save money overall because the enforcement of MDMA prohibition will not have to continue, less non-violent offenders in the prison system, tax on the purchasing of MDMA, jobs to regulate and keep standards of safe drug use. If thousands of more people die annually due to alcohol consumption is it morally okay to restrict people of their rights? Freedom of choice and learning consequences should be an aspect everyone should be able to practice.

Personal Context: I am interested in this research question because I think it covers a controversial topic that isn't discussed as much as it should be. It takes a logical stance on what seems to be rather radical. This research question doesn't affect my values because I'm in support of drug legalization and regulation. I feel as if everyone should have the right to use any substance as long as they are not causing any danger to someone else. MDMA users are non-violent offenders who should have the right to monitor their own bodies. I personally do not have any experience regarding MDMA or PTSD but I am in full support of finding the best treatment. What qualifies me to be able to write this is the fact that MDMA use is rampant with my generation and in this current date, mental illnesses are a serious topic for discussion in today's society, and its heavy influence on the dance music scene and culture.

The central claim of the journal of psychpharmacology is that MDMA has recieved a bad image and improper judgement due to demonization. These actions interfere with the expansion of knowledge of these drugs, especially potential ailments. On a small scale this is detrimental but it also interferes with the prosperation of new scientific evidence.

One major value of this source is that it discusses the importance of social and cultural perceptions. The perception that MDMA is completely bad and killing our children is over dramatized and allows emotion to block rational thought.

The authors of this piece are both members of the psychopharmacology department at the University of Bristol. They are writing for the Journal of Psychopharmacology with sources fromnational organizations and other related pharmacologists.

The central claim of the Drugs.com source was to give a brief overview of its origins, its effects, its popularity, and potential health hazards of MDMA use.

A major thing at stake in this article is the health hazards. It mentions several health hazards but fails to mention that these effects are either reversible or due to inappropriate consumption.

This source seemed to lack references therefore I am not sure how reliable this source is. It seems to portray MDMA as an ''evil" drug. This source fails to mention positive properties of MDMA and rather displays it more as an epidemic rather than a potential cure.

The central claim to the Treating PTSD with MDMA-Assisted Psychotherapy source is that people who have suffered from PTSD have been known to have successful MDMA-assisted treatment sessions. It is now starting to gain poularity around the world and hopefully it will become an adopted practice.

In this article there really isn't anything at stake, it is more of an advertisement of their practice by letting the audience know of the statistics and facts behind MDMA-Assisted psychotherapy.

There seems to be a fair balance of bias in this article. It mentions the fact that there are no negative side effects to taking a healthy dose of safe and regulated MDMA.

Feasibility: The reason as to why this research question is so arguable is because it challenges the status quo of all drugs are bad and instead asks to take a more logical approach to appropriate drug use. The agreements I have found between my sources is that two of them mentioned the fact that there are no levels of neuropsychological effects or signs of neurotoxicity after responsible dosage. After noticing the different perspectives in these sources I have noticed that I need to pay attention to articles that do agree with me and try to pook holes at that certain arguement.

