IN THE ROUSE V. CAMERON DECISION (1966), THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ENUNCIATED A CONSTITUTIONAL 'RIGHT TO TREATMENT' WHICH PROVIDED A BASIS FOR ACTIONS AGAINST STATE HOSPITALS AND YOUTH FACILITIES ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY. FOCUSING ON THE BACKGROUND OF CAMERON AND THE DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE JOHN DANAHER, THIS ARTICLE ANALYZES THE LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR THE 'RIGHT TO TREATMENT' DOCTRINE. THE IMPLICATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE DOCTRINE ARE APPROACHED FROM THE PERSPECTIVES OF IMPACT ON STATE FACILITIES, CONFLICT WITH THE EXERCISE OF PROFESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION, PROBLEMS WITH THE MEDICAL MODEL, AND THE EFFECT OF REFORM. THE LIMITS AND FUTURE OF THE RIGHT TO TREATMENT ARE DISCUSSED IN A CASE-BY-CASE ANALYSIS....MSP