Wisconsin[89] provides for a special board to consider the cases of "all inmates of state and county institutions for criminal, insane, feeble-minded and epileptic persons," prior to their release. The law has some good features, and has been applied to a hundred or more feeble-minded persons. In 1911 the American Breeders' Association appointed a "Committee to Study and Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population," and this committee has been at work ever since, under auspices of the Eugenics Record Office, making a particular study of legal sterilization. It points out[90] that a sterilization law, to be of the greatest possible value, must: (1) Consider sterilization as a eugenic measure, not as a punitive or even therapeutic one. (2) Provide due process of law, before any operation is carried out. (3) Provide adequate and competent executive agents. (4) Designate only proper classes of persons as subject to the law. (5) Provide for the nomination of individuals for sterilization, by suitable procedure. (6) Make an adequate investigation of each case, the family history being the most important part, and one which is often neglected at present. (7) Have express and adequate criteria for determining upon sterilization. (8) Designate the type of operation authorized. (9) Make each distinct step mandatory and fix definitely the responsibility for it. (10) Make adequate appropriation for carrying out the measure. Tested by such standards, there is not a sterilization law in existence in the United States at the time this is written that is wholly commendable; and those introduced in various states during the last few years, but not passed, show few signs of improvement. It is evident that the commendable zeal has not had adequate guidance, in the drafting of sterilization legislation. The committee above referred to has drawn up a model law, and states which wish to adopt a program of legislative sterilization should pass a measure embodying at least the principles of this model law. But, as we have pointed out, wholesale sterilization is an unsatisfactory substitute for segregation. There are cases where it is advisable, in states too poor or niggardly to care adequately for their defectives and delinquents, but eugenists should favor segregation as the main policy, with sterilization for the special cases as previously indicated.