TRADITIONALLY THE SOCIAL DEFENSE MOVEMENT AND THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR SOCIAL DEFENSE HAVE NEVER BEEN CONTENT TO REST ON PAST ACHIEVEMENTS AND PERIODICALLY REEVALUATE THEIR CONCEPTS IN RELATION TO SOCIAL REALITY. THE CONCEPT OF REHABILITATION AND TREATMENT, WHICH IS CENTRAL TO SOCIAL DEFENSE, EVOLVED IN RESPONSE TO THE CLASSICAL PENAL CONCEPT WHICH ALIENATED THE OFFENDER EVEN FURTHER FROM SOCIETY. SINCE THEN THE INDIVIDUALIZED TREATMENT CONCEPT HAS EXERTED CONSIDERABLE INFLUENCE ON CRIMINAL POLICY. HOWEVER, THE FAILURE TO PRODUCE CONCLUSIVE RESULTS OR UNIFORM TREATMENT METHODS HAS NECESSITATED A REEXAMINATION OF THE CONCEPT. PRESENT OFFENDER TREATMENT RUNS INTO TWO MAIN DANGERS: (1) IT CAN BECOME OBNOXIOUS MORALIZING AND PREACHING AND (2) THE 'REHABILITATED' OFFENDER MERELY LAPSES INTO A PASSIVE ACCEPTANCE OF SOCIETY. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HUMANIST BACKGROUND OF SOCIAL DEFENSE, SUCH PASSIVE ACCEPTANCE CAN NEVER BE THE INTENT OF SOCIAL DEFENSE WHICH HAS ALWAYS WANTED TO RESTORE A SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTONOMY TO THE OFFENDERS. DESPITE THESE OBJECTIONS, TREATMENT STILL HAS SIGNIFICANCE IN SOME CORRECTIONAL AREAS: THE TREATMENT OF THE SICK, INFIRM, OR HANDICAPPED; VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND EDUCATION; AND THE CLOSE SUPERVISION OF OFFENDERS RECEIVING CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. THE ARTICLE INCLUDES FOOTNOTES. --IN FRENCH.