ABSTRACT
A long-standing practice in clinical and developmental psychology research on childhood maltreatment has been to consider prospective, official court records to be the gold standard measure of childhood maltreatment and to give less weight to adults' retrospective self-reports of childhood maltreatment, sometimes even treating this data source as invalid. We argue that both formats of assessment - prospective and retrospective - provide important information on childhood maltreatment. Prospective data drawn from court records should not necessarily be considered the superior format, especially considering evidence of structural racism in child welfare. Part I overviews current maltreatment definitions in the context of the developmental psychopathology (DP) framework that has guided maltreatment research for over 40 years. Part II describes the ongoing debate about the disproportionalities of minoritized children at multiple decision-making stages of the child welfare system and the role that racism plays in many minoritized families' experience of this system. Part III offers alternative interpretations for the lack of concordance between prospective, official records of childhood maltreatment and retrospective self-reports, and for the differential associations between each format of data with health outcomes. Moving forward, we recommend that future DP research on childhood maltreatment apply more inclusive, diversity and equity-informed approaches when assessing and interpreting the effects of childhood maltreatment on lifespan and intergenerational outcomes. We encourage future generations of DP scholars to use assessment methods that affirm the lived experiences of individuals and families who have directly experienced maltreatment and the child welfare system.