The stated purposes of the Patuxent Institution are to identify a class of offenders termed 'defective delinquents', to detain offenders so labeled for the protection of society, and to attempt, where appropriate, to cure such persons. Research on the practical applications of these aims is important because of the increasing tendency in American society to substitute medical for legal and political values when dealing with antisocial behavior. The issues examined were whether or not defective delinquents can be reliably and scientifically distinguished from other delinquents, the nature of antisocial conduct, whether the state has the right to limit the freedom of 'undesireables' even when they are no longer serving a criminal sentence and regardless of the nature of the offense committed, and the place of procedural due process in such commitment proceedings. Research suggests that the concepts and presuppositions underlying Patuxent and the therapeutic state are legally, scientifically, and ethically inadequate. Their purported medical objectivity is a mask for the imposition of social control over persons whose behavior threatens normative social values, even though no serious threat to life and property can be scientifically established. Patuxent was found to fail in treating, curing, or even incapacitating truly recidivistic and dengerous offenders. The institution should therefore be abolished and the validity of the concept of the therapeutic state should be reexamined. Tabular data, footnotes, and approximately 200 references are provided.