KINSHIP CARE POLICY: EXACERBATING WOMEN'S OPPRESSION THROUGH NEOLIBERAL FAMILIALIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under neoliberal capitalist globalization, women's poverty and the deepening of women’s oppression and exploitation have been notorious. Indeed, women are facing poverty all over the world, including in industrialized capitalist countries. Women living in poverty and particularly poor single mothers have been targets of the counter neoliberal reform of the capitalist welfare state. This counter reform is a gendered, classist, and complex alteration that has assaulted the social responsibilities and budgets of the welfare state. The impact of neoliberal policies against single mothers is evident in Ontario. However, policymakers continue taking away the assistance and social welfare programs that used to support single mothers. Neoliberal governments have created provincial policies to reinforce women’s unpaid caring responsibilities and to intensify the surveillance and control exerted over poor Ontarian single mothers. This qualitative case study has explores critically the role of neoliberal social policy in Ontario child welfare. Through a feminist approach and using official documentary data, this research analyzes Ontario Kinship Care Policy. The study looks at the historical and social context in which the policy was formulated, depicts the main goals of the policy, and analyzes the policy’s outcomes both, for the system and for women. Possible areas of future research on this policy are listed in the conclusions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".