The discussion focuses on purposes for court referrals, statutes used for psychiatric remands, characteristics of forensic patients, diagnoses and recommendations by clinicians, and the relationship between psychiatric recommendation and judicial outcome. The research instrument was a summary sheet completed by participating psychiatrists at the conclusion of each court-referred assessment. Psychiatrists supplied data on all adults assessed on pretrial or presentence remand from July 1 to July 31, 1978. The systems of psychiatric remands were not found to be arbitrary and unjust, but neither did they consistently dispense social justice for mentally disordered persons involved in the legal system. Law, policies, and procedures vary considerably across Canadian jurisdictions. Attempts to centralize and regulate relevant law and reformulate processes of psychiatric assessments must begin with more general evaluations of the relationship between the medical and legal professions. Psychiatrists are of greatest service to the criminal justice system when they function as screening agents rather than as substitutes for judicial decisionmakers. To date, policy and research has focused primarily on the activities of clinicians while largely neglecting the practices of the courts in enlisting the services of medical experts. Only through a more balanced perspective will systems be capable of differentiating accurately between persons best processed through the criminal justice system and those in need of diversion into mental health facilities. Tabular and graphic data and 45 references are provided.