SOME PROPONENTS OF SPECIAL FACILITIES FAVOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF THESE FACILITIES FOR THE FORCED REFORMATION OF MENTALLY ILL OFFENDERS, CLAIMING THAT SUCH FACILITIES WILL REDUCE THE RATE OF CRIME. EVEN IF PSYCHIATRIC, PSYCHOLOGICAL, BIOCHEMICAL, AND NEUROLOGICAL TREATMENT MODES ARE EFFECTIVE, THERE IS LITTLE EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION OF THESE TREATMENT MODES WILL LEAD TO A SIGNIFICANT OR EVEN A NOTICEABLE REDUCTION IN THE GENERAL RATE OF CRIME. FOR THE DANGEROUSLY MENTALLY ILL, THE RESULTS OF CORRECTIONAL REHABILITATION EFFORTS ARE AS IMPORTANT AS THE RESULTS OF TRADITIONAL PSYCHOTHERAPEUTIC METHODS. APART FROM CONSIDERATIONS OF EFFICACY, RELEVANT TREATMENT QUESTIONS INCLUDE THE CONSTITUTIONAL OR LEGAL RIGHT TO TREATMENT AND THE EMERGING RIGHT OF PRISONERS AND PATIENTS TO REFUSE TREATMENT. THE LEGAL SYSTEM, THROUGH CASE LAW, LEGISLATION, AND ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS, IS STEADILY DEFINING AND REFINING THE RIGHT TO RESIST TREATMENT. IN VIEW OF THIS RIGHT, LEGISLATORS AND OTHER OFFICIALS WHO ARE CONTEMPLATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF LARGE SECURITY AND SPECIAL HOSPITALS IN ORDER TO FORCE TREATMENT ON RESIDENTS MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THEIR GOAL WILL NOT, FOR THE MOST PART, BE LEGALLY ATTAINABLE. IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE BALANCE BETWEEN ACCORDING POLICE POWER PATIENTS (PATIENTS COMMITTED PURSUANT TO THE POLICE POWER OF THE STATE) THE RIGHT TO REFUSE THERAPY AND, AT THE SAME TIME, ALLOWING THEM TO SUBMIT TO THERAPY TO WHICH THEY GIVE THEIR INFORMED CONSENT, IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR THE COURTS TO CLARIFY THE CONCEPT OF CONSENT. THE SOLUTION SEEMS TO LIE IN RECOGNIZING THAT PRESSURE TO SELECT A PARTICULAR OPTION, EVEN IF PRESSURE IS GENERATED BY A DESIRE TO AVOID OR REDUCE INCARCERATION, SHOULD NOT ITSELF BY DEEMED THE LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF COERCION. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (DEP)