The articles in this month’s issue of The Gerontologist, as always, demonstrate considerable breadth in content and scope. In particular there are important contributions to the science of elder abuse (EA) and elder mistreatment (EM). These contributions include theoretical/conceptual advances and measurement innovation, along with other insightful descriptive work. I must admit: as I drafted this editorial the scholarship of this month’s issue took on a sense of urgency to me. As of this writing in April, my local newspaper of record, the StarTribune, published a horrific story this past week of an older resident who was sexually assaulted in a local nursing home by a staff person; this abuse was confirmed via a video camera a family member had installed in their relative’s room (the state of Minnesota as well as 13 other states have enshrined in law the right of families to install monitoring devices as a means to detect such abuse; Serres, 2023; The National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care, n.d.). The need to advance our work in conceptualizing, measuring, and intervening to prevent EA and EM may be more pressing than ever before; with the advent of surveillance technology that families can use, it is very possible that confirmation of EM and EA events may increase, though I am not aware of any research on this issue. In and of itself, this would be a very interesting study to publish in The Gerontologist: in the 14 states where families and others can utilize surveillance cameras in nursing homes, is there an identifiable surge in reported and/or confirmed EA/EM cases? The central tension articulated by Martinez et al. (2023) in this issue resonates with me: The need to effectively balance acceptable risk with older persons’ autonomy to potentially reduce EM risk. I would hope that the scholarship on display in The Gerontologist is disseminated and implemented in such a way that the incidents of abuse such as those reported here in the Twin Cities are prevented.