MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3123770708

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Beginning to Examine the Implications for Canadian Lawyers' Professional Responsibilities

2012· article· en· W3123770708 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
H. Archibald Kaiser

Notice bibliographique

RevueHealth law review · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésConventionConvention on the Rights of Persons with DisabilitiesLawDignityPolitical scienceImpartialityHuman rightsSociology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities^ (hereafter CRPD or Convention) should herald a new epoch in way persons with disabilities are treated throughout world community. The entire panoply of ramifications of this Convention, purpose of which is promote, protect and ensure full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity, (Article 1) is as yet unascertainable. However, States Parties must take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination by any person, organization or private enterprise (Article 4 (1) (e)), among other obligations. For self-governing legal profession, primary responsibility for ensuring compliance falls to its individual members, its law societies and its federations. This mission is critical in order to demonstrate that lawyers avoid discriminatory customs and practices (Article 4(l)(c)) and it is incumbent upon profession as it continues to fulfil its essential role as an unwritten pillar of Canadian constitution in upholding rule of This article provides a small contribution to extensive self-examination mandated by Convention for bar. It offers a brief overview of CRPD in order to introduce its rich array of novel measures. The paper spotlights principles of professional ethics which are implicated by Convention and identifies other areas of governance and policy wherein lawyers should consider its effects. The article then endeavours to articulate features of moral dimension of legal professionalism which must be reconfigured in wake of Convention, The exhortations of CRPD for lawyers seem daunting, but prescribed reforms are both socially responsible and long overdue; The concentration herein will be on persons with long-term mental or intellectual (Article 1), who experience discrimination and stigma most acutely, as exemplified by readiness of society and legal system to intrude upon their autonomy, remove their capacity for decision-making, permit forcible interventions and confine them to live in conditions of poverty (Preamble (t)). However, most of following comments would apply to other persons with disabilities who have physical or sensory impairments (Article 1). Introducing CRPD: An Innovative and Ambitious International Human Rights Treaty The reach of international human rights law has been vastly extended since United Nations adopted Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, recognizing the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of human family (Preamble, para. I). (2) Kate Parlett celebrated its impact, having transformed rhetoric and declarations of human rights into legal rights and obligations, indeed occupy a more permanent place in international law and to form part of general international law. (3) Growth in rights protection occurred too slowly for persons with disabilities prior to Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities coming into effect in 2007. The CRPD, first twenty-first century human rights treaty, was negotiated rapidly, emerging in less than five years from inception of deliberations of an Ad Hoc Committee in 2002. The Convention has been enthusiastically received by persons with disabilities, an outlook in keeping with the highest level of participation by representatives of civil society, overwhelmingly that of persons with disability and disabled persons organizations, of any human rights convention in history. (4) This substantial involvement in formulation of CRPD by persons with disabilities has influenced its content and will shape ensuing processes of implementation and monitoring. Whether CRPD creates new rights or merely connects general international human rights law to people with disabilities has been debated, but no one doubts that its cumulative effect should be enormous. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,857
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,994

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,019
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0250,022
Communication savante0,0150,008
Science ouverte0,0030,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,013
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,149
Tête enseignante GPT0,470
Écart entre enseignants0,321 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2012
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHealth law reviewMême sujetLegal Education and Practice InnovationsTravaux en français237 207