This article considers the implications of theory and research in developmentalpsychopathology for existing and emerging social policy concerning treatment of child andadolescent psychopathology. Based on the concept that all psychopathology is a process, fourcore principles of a developmental psychopathology perspective are discussed. In turn, each isapplied to an evaluation of policy issues with implications for intervention, including mental healthparity, treatment guidelines, mental health reimbursement, and level of intervention. It isconcluded that social policy on treatment must be based on an empirically supported theory ofdevelopmental psychopathology and on evidence-based interventions that link treatments topathogenic processes.

This paper examines the conceptual and empirical connections between competence andpsychopathology, two historically rich traditions for the study of adaptation in development, andwhat might be gained from their integration. Historical roots of these two traditions are reviewed,then overlaps in their definition are considered, with a focus on the ways in which judgmentsabout competence enter into the nosology of mental disorders. DSM-IV is analyzed from theperspective of competence, and the debate about “harmful dysfunction” indefining mental disorder is discussed in relation to competence. Different models explaining theempirical associations of competence and psychopathology are delineated, and illustrativeempirical evidence is provided. Potential explanations include confounded concepts andmethods, symptoms undermining the effectiveness of adaptation in the environment, failures inage-salient developmental tasks leading to emotional and behavioral problems, transactionalinfluences, shared vulnerability or risk factors producing both kinds of difficulties, and morecomplex models. The potential benefits of integrating competence and psychopathology as twomajor approaches to adaptation are discussed in regard to theory, classification of mentaldisorder, research, and intervention.

The focus of this article is on the interface between research on resilience—a constructrepresenting positive adaptation despite adversity —and the applications of this work to thedevelopment of interventions and social policies. Salient defining features of research on resilienceare delineated, as are various advantages, limitations, and precautions linked with the applicationof the resilience framework to developing interventions. For future applied efforts within thistradition, a series of guiding principles are presented along with exemplars of existing programsbased on the resilience paradigm. The article concludes with discussions of directions for futurework in this area, with emphases on an enhanced interface between science and practice, and abroadened scope of resilience-based interventions in terms of the types of populations, and thetypes of adjustment domains, that are encompassed.