6. Shall the public authorities have the power to compel isolation and special training at local or state schools? These powers have already been provided by laws in a number of states. Thus far the law has not outstripped scientific knowledge. How far the authorities should use their discretion under these laws to force isolation is a question which calls for the utmost good judgment on their part. In case the parents or guardians of the socially deficient can be convinced of the desirability of such isolation, this procedure is undoubtedly to be urged. When the guardian has once consented to the isolation of his charge, he should not be permitted to remove the individual from such care without the consent of the proper public authority, which would of course be reviewable in court. During this period of uncertainty as to the prognosis of social deficiency, such a procedure would perhaps be preferable to forced isolation in most cases, since the authorities might be less troubled by the frequent annoyance of legal actions begun by parents who had their children forcibly removed to institutions. In some states unscrupulous attorneys have deliberately stirred up parents to try to get back their children who had been taken away by force, thus seriously interfering with the administration of laws for compulsory isolation. Without the possibility of compulsory isolation of the socially deficient for an indefinite time, we shall perpetuate the disgraceful spectacle now observable in many states which cannot legally prevent a feeble-minded parent removing a feeble-minded girl from an institution to which she may be brought back a few years later with one or more illegitimate, feeble-minded children. Our legal omissions should not thus handicap the wisdom of society. The 1917 codification of the Minnesota laws relating to defective, delinquent and deficient children should be seen by those who are interested in the legal aspects of these questions. It was brought about by the Minnesota Child Welfare Commission, of which Judge Edward F. Waite was chairman. 7. In case we suddenly segregate for life all those who are so deficient that we are justified in isolating them, would that solve the problem of delinquency for the next generation? Although this would be the most important attack which could be made on the most important known cause of delinquency, we must still answer that the results would hardly be comparable with a jail delivery. There is nothing to be gained by turning our backs upon the facts. Goring has estimated that 7.2% of the male population of England and Wales commit crime before death. We could not possibly suppose that more than 1% of the male population could be justly isolated for deficiency. Even if all the deficients committed crime, at least six-sevenths of the criminals in these countries, about which we have the best means of estimating, are presumably individuals who could not be isolated for deficiency.