Self-advocacy, Rights and Legislation: The Experiences of Self-advocates in Nova Scotia and Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Through my research I listened to the self-advocacy experiences of people labelled with intellectual disability in Nova Scotia, which maintains segregated residential centres, and Ontario, which had closed all such centres by 2009.I did so in order to answer a key question: is there a difference between self-advocates' views of deinstitutionalization in Nova Scotia and Ontario?Specifically, is there greater anxiety in Nova Scotia given the continued existence of segregated centres in that province?Following Malhotra and Rowe (2014), I inquired into the relationship between law, advocacy, and identity.I conceptualized my findings through cultural disability theory to scrutinize disability and impairment.This is important as the intellectual disability impairment label is a key component of the management and oppression of advocates so labelled (Altermark, 2017).I used a Foucauldian power lens to understand further how selfadvocates are governed, and also how they resist power through their advocacy initiatives.I also used Agamben's (1998) theory of sovereign power to explore the persistence of institutionalization, despite the existence of disability rights legislation.My research revealed, most notably, no significant difference in views on deinstitutionalization between my research participants, who were all members of a selfadvocacy organization, in Nova Scotia and Ontario, despite the presence of a more oppressive disability support system policy in Nova Scotia.This implies that membership in a self-advocacy organization empowers people in such a way that participants in Nova Scotia did not relay any fear of the potential for institutionalization in the future.It seems, significantly, that when participants know that they have rights, iii they feel protected from institutionalization.They also feel empowered to challenge and resist ableist power structures, including states of exception, through self-advocacy.As such, I found a recursive relationship between identity, relational autonomy, resilience, and self-advocacy, once there is a consciousness of rights.The importance of understanding the rights advocacy of self-advocates cannot be understated as it is a key component in the fight to prevent the reversal of de-institutionalization, a reversal that many scholars warn could happen due to entrenched, systemic ableism (Malacrida, 2015).I dedicate this thesis to the memory of my lovely Mum, Heather, whose courageous life was a constant source of inspiration to me.She would have been delighted that I completed a PhD.I also dedicate this thesis to the memory of Dave Kent, President of People First Nova Scotia.He fought tirelessly and publicly for the rights of all people labelled with intellectual disabilities for many years and was very supportive of this project.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,037 | 0,021 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».