In this commentary, we respond to Barth and colleagues and critique their premise that Western-based research with population-level administrative data is the best and only valid evidence on which to base child welfare policy and practice changes. We offer an alternative viewpoint on what forms of evidence should be brought to bear as we consider re-envisioning the child welfare system, highlighting the importance of lived experience and the need to consider the evidence regarding all marginalized racial and ethnic groups. We argue that evidence should represent the perspectives of those with lived experience and that collaborative child welfare research can strengthen the validity of analyses and interpretations. We hold that Barth et al. ask and answer the wrong questions. We press for deeper critical reflection, a more nuanced intersectional lens, and urgent action to address structural and institutional racism in the child welfare system.

在这篇评论中，我们回应了 Barth 及其同事并批评了他们的前提，即基于西方的人口管理数据研究是儿童福利政策和实践变化的最佳和唯一有效证据。当我们考虑重新设想儿童福利制度时，我们就应该采用何种形式的证据提出了另一种观点，强调了生活经验的重要性以及考虑所有边缘化种族和族裔群体的证据的必要性。我们认为证据应该代表那些有生活经验的人的观点，并且协作儿童福利研究可以加强分析和解释的有效性。我们认为 Barth 等人。提出并回答错误的问题。我们敦促进行更深入的批判性反思，