I was interested in this research question because I have always found the study of human behavior interesting. I have always found the brain and how it works to be so fascinating. Most of my fascination with psychology is mental illness. I always wanted to know how do mental illness get treated. Specifically, how do you treat the mentally ill that are untreatable such as psychopaths. So I chose to go with a topic on how to treat a psychopath because the question could go either way. This question covers the physical treatment by the doctors and by the people. This research question does not really affect my values or me.  I have no family that are mentally ill that I know of. This question is simply a research question to me. I have no personal experience with this question except from what I see on TV. Their have been movies and TV shows on the treatment of psychopaths. I know that psychopaths have no emotion, have no empathy. I have read that most doctors treat mental ill patients with therapy which leads to drugs. I do not have much qualifications to write about this. I am a psychology major and I have taken several psychology classes. 

The authors for this article are Kent A. Kiehl and Morris B Hoffman. Kent A. Kiehl has countless publications in psychology reviews graduate student applications in clinical and cognitive areas. He teaches psychology classes and his research area is cognition, brain, and behavior. Morris Hoffman is a judge in Denver. He contributes the criminal background of the article. To summarize this article, it talks about the history of a psychopath, the impact psychopaths have on the criminal justice system, the traditional clinical assessments for psychopathy, the emerging neuroimaging findings and a discussion of recent treatment studies and their potential economic impacts. This article major claim is that there is no definite way to "cure" a psychopath. The major values and interest at stake for the article there are no interests at stake much in this. This article mostly explains what a psychopath is and how they are diagnosed.

The author of this article is James L. Loving he is a doctor. There weren't many details on him online. So judging from the details online he is very creditable to write about this topic since there was not much accessible credits on him. To summarize this article, it is about a checklist that can assist with screening, program implementation, and decision making throughout the course of treatment. Based off of this rating from this checklist decides the course of treatment of psychopathy. The central claim of this article is that the PCL-R which has been referred to as the "gold standard". The major values and interest at stake for this article would be the fact that how can a test describe the level of psychotic a person is. Whoever is taking the test could easily lie or try to be less psychotic then they really are and then they do not have the "right treatment". 

The authors that wrote this article are Graham Danzer and Asha Wilkus Stone. Graham Denzer is a clinical psychology intern. He has a specialty in abnormal Psychology, Personality Psychology, Clinical Psychology. Asha Wilkus Stone is a therapist trainee at Santa Rosa Junior College Student Psychological Services. In Summary, this article touches on the different types or forms in which the mentally ill are treated in a hospital. They touch on the fact that most mental illness's go untreated until it comes down to the harmful acts on themselves. Also how no one wants to get treated for their illness because of the stereotype behind it and they do not want to be judged. This article touches on that involuntary treatment can make the patient feel very humiliated. This article had several conflicts with some values, one being the involuntary hospitalization. Some people could feel like its not right to give someone forced treatment if they don't want it. 

It can be arguable because some people could say that even though people do not know exactly what treats a mental illness so why try to fix it. And some could say everyone deserves to be treated and to be "fixed". This topic calls to question our own human behavior. I agree that some people do need to be hospitalized against their will. Without being held in a hospital to get help they could be doing more harm to themselves and to the rest of society. I do agree as well with the treatment plan for a psychopath to try and get them to feel like the average person. I do not agree with some treatment plans such as confinement and traumatizing the patients. I do not agree that cutting them off from the world will help treat them. I have never been the type to think scaring the person straight is effective as affection.

My perspective on treating a person affects my own. Since I do plan to be a psychiatrist this gives me a different perspective because I am the type to think affection and love is the best sort of treatment plan. I have always thought tat treating the mentally ill as a person instead of a patient is best. I now see that some illnesses do need a higher extent of treatment.  I might need to be more specific with my question instead of so broad and vague. 

Reflection

My research process was quite a journey. It was not that difficult to do the research and actually find the information which was a good thing. There were tons of information on both topics I had. My first topic was just too hard to narrow down for me to actually articulate a strong argument. I found so much information on that topic I wanted to include it all and my argument got lost in all that outside information. My second topic was a little harder to find information for but I ended up finding information that went towards my argument. Since my topic changed later on in the semester my opinion on this topic hasn't changed much. I definitely can say after my research that I do not want to feel the sadness of being without and it has given me the motivation to keep on pursuing my schooling and saving my money so that when I do get to be on my own that I will just live a happy and well financed when I grow up. My argument of having the means to pay for something to make someone else happy makes you happy really influenced this change on me the most. I never really thought about how heart breaking it could be to not be able give someone else a blessing with a gift or just something simple as being able to buy your children dinner. I didn't really realize how crucial it would feel to be able to do such a thing and how happy you would feel from being able to do that. No, I do not feel qualified to comment on this issue still because I was a child that was well taken care of when I grew up. I never felt such sadness of not being able to buy something because I have always had the means to pay for something or for someone. That being said since I have not experienced the sadness and I have only felt the joys of having money I do not feel I am qualified enough. 
