Palliative Care: An Enforceable Canadian Human Right?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article lays out a series of approaches for establishing an enforceable human right to palliative care in Canada. The article first examines international human rights instruments to which Canada is a signatory, and concludes that they offer limited assistance to palliative care advocates. The article then examines two promising Charter challenges. The first, based on section 15, argues that since palliative care is provided unevenly to those who require it, the equality provisions of the Charter could compel equitable provision of palliative care to Canadians with life-limiting illnesses. The second is based on section 7, and argues that failure to provide palliative care may impose an unacceptable level of psychological stress on those at the end of life. The article concludes with a look at the limitations of a Charter challenge, includ-ing justification under section 1 of the Charter, and the lack of empirical evidence necessary to conclusively prove the arguments advanced under sections 15 and 7.
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 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".