At a coqyess like ours, occupied with a subject so iirrireiisallg important as the treatment of psychopaths, especially the criminal psychopatlis, several repetitions in the contributions proposed for dixcnssioii caiinot be avoided. This ciwmiiataiice cannot, however, fail to give greatel. iniportoiwe to tlir rwnlts of the congress, showing as it does that psychiatraists looking at the problem froiii tliffereiit points of view, in conmpence of different working fields, differences of conditions in each country, ;tilt1 tenipn.arnenta1 tlifft.~*encry inay reach the Rilnle views on iiiairy points. 111 coniiectioir with the qnestioii of twtitiiient I hare felt justified in calling attention to a special part of the diagnostic problem, because these two plienoinena, in psychiatry as well as in the rest of tlie iiiedical wieiice, are not easily separated, although, thew is ratliela often R tendency to ~rialce NICIL R separation in forensic psychiatric practice. Tlie following cwnsiderations are an exponent of the situations as it appears to a Danish forensic psychiatr4st occupied eyery day with the results of this diagnosing.Ry diagnosing I iiiiderstaiid in this connection not only tlie record of a picture of state and course, which by more or less justification may be clesignated as psychopath;F, but tlie concept also incliitlea the foremicpsychia tric coiicliisioii to be tli~awn 011 the basis of the calinic*al pictiwe in geiieml.