“No Place Like Home”: Gender, Family, and the Politics of Home Care in Post-World War II Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the early 1990s home care increasingly has emerged as a favoured policy response to the growing costs which an aging population poses for our health care system. This paper explores the early history of home care for the elderly in Ontario during the first three decades after World War II. It demonstrates that policy debates over the merits of home versus institutional care for the elderly, and community-based over hospital-based approaches to home care are not recent phenomenon but have been on going since the 1940s within the public health and social services sector. The paper examines why home care failed for so long to develop beyond the margins of Ontario's highly institutionalized health care system. It also explores how earlier visions of community-based home care, designed to help the elderly age in place, increasingly were obscured by an exclusive preoccupation with home care's "cost effectiveness" as an alternative to hospital or residential care, a rationale which discounted home care's costs to unpaid and principally female care givers. The paper concludes that the Ontario health ministry's systematic devaluing of caregiving and home maker skills, the fear of undermining the family's willingness to provide care, as well as the failure to develop effective mechanisms for integrated regional health care planning, also impeded the progress of home care's development before the 1980s.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".