PARTICIPANTS INCLUDE STATE ASSEMBLYMEN, A SENATOR, ADMINISTRATORS OF STATE HOSPITALS, PHYSICIANS AND PSYCHIATRISTS, REPRESENTATIVES OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS' OFFICES AND THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, AND OFFICERS OF COMMUNITY RELEASE BOARDS AND PAROLE CLINICS. DISCUSSIONS AIMED AT CLARIFYING THE BASIC PHILOSOPHIES AND PROVISIONS OF COMPETING LEGISLATION ON DANGEROUS OFFENDERS. SPECIFIC TOPICS WERE THE ETHICS OF EXTENDED COMMITMENT FOR SUPPOSED DANGEROUS VIOLENT OFFENDERS AND THE PROVISION OF INTENSIVE INPATIENT TREATMENT FOR SUCH OFFENDERS. OPINIONS DIFFERED REGARDING THE RELIABILITY OF PSYCHIATRIC MEANS OF PREDICTING AND DIMINISHED CAPACITY. DEBATE ALSO AROSE REGARDING THE CONFLICTING REALMS OF LEGAL AND CLINICAL DECISIONMAKING AND THE CREATION OF GENERAL STATUS CRIME BY MEANS OF A STATUTORY DEFINITION OF DANGEROUSNESS. TESTIMONY BY A PAROLE CLINIC OFFICIAL DISCLOSED THAT ABOUT 42 PERCENT OF PRISONERS RELEASED ON CONDITION OF FURTHER TREATMENT STILL REQUIRED INPATIENT RATHER THAN OUTPATIENT CARE. A RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE THAT A COMMISSION BE APPOINTED TO SET STANDARDS FOR ASSURING THAT UNIFORM DEFINITIONS OF DANGEROUSNESS ARE ADOPTED AND UTILIZED IN COURTS. THE COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE WAS A POINT OF DISPUTE. (MRK)