Whenever the parents are sick, selfish, or ignorant; when the children are undisciplined and uncontrolled, and where the grind of poverty has reduced ethics to the most primitive basis, one cannot expect much. When a child is in constant contact with a tuberculous individual, no matter how careful that individual may try to be, there is always some danger. By the very nature of his disease, a consumptive cannot be a hundred per cent. careful. An adult living in contact with tuberculosis may be able to resist it, a child has infinitely less chance. The only way to ensure absolute safety for the child is to remove it from the danger, or to remove danger from it. Either the child must be removed from the house, or the patient must be removed from the house, it makes little difference which. The patient may be sent to an institution, or the child may be sent to a relative, to the country, to a neighbour, or to one of the child-saving agencies that are to be found in most communities. We are aware that in advocating this policy we are advocating what is called by the unthinking “breaking up the home,” as if tuberculosis had not long ago preceded us in this. Sending away the parent or the child is merely a belated effort to save what is left of the home. Whenever an institution is possible, the patient should go there. In many communities, however, there are no such facilities, or else their capacity is limited. In this case, the child is the one to be removed. This often becomes a matter of extreme difficulty, since it is hard to overcome the parent’s very natural resistance. In urging this separation, we are making a choice between two lives—one already doomed, and the other which may be saved from a similar fate. =Tuberculosis in Children.= Although children become infected at an early age, it is often most difficult to obtain a diagnosis for them. The most competent specialist hesitates to pronounce a child tuberculous until he has repeatedly examined it, and kept it under constant observation—and even then he may prefer to call it “suspicious only.” By the aid of the eye test and the skin test he may finally arrive at a positive diagnosis, but even then, he may not be sure of the location of the lesion. The child, therefore, though diagnostically a positive case, is not necessarily an infectious one.