ENDURING POWERS of ATTORNEY AND FINANCIAL ABUSE OF OLDER PERSONS: ARE EXISTING SAFEGUARDS SUFFICIENT?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has shown that older persons, particularly those with diminished capacity, are vulnerable to financial abuse by enduring power of attorney, which is otherwise an effective estate planning tool. Current legislation in Nova Scotia is not adequate to protect older persons from such financial abuse, which can be extremely devastating for them not only financially but physically and emotionally. Improvements to legislation are one part of the multi-dimensional solution to the problem. Educational initiatives for donors, attorneys and others is critical. Non-adversarial remedial measures to abuse, such as restorative approaches and elder mediation, must be fostered, as they provide for reconciliation, not retribution. An effective enforcement body, such as a remodeled Public Trustee's Office, with a Registry for enduring powers of attorney and a mandate to investigate and take action to remedy financial abuse by attorneys, is essential. While all measures involve expending more public funds, the public policy benefits would certainly justify the costs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".