Erick Fabris, Tranquil Prisons: Chemical Incarceration under Community Treatment Orders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4376-5), $27.99 ebook (978-1-4426-9689-1).F abris expertly weaves a narrative of his own experiences with "men- tal illness" through this timely and thoughtful critique of the mental health system and Community Treatment Orders (CTOs).Community Treatment Orders have been legislated across Canada in one form or another since the mid-1990s and are agreements signed between a mental health patient and a physician that binds the patient to follow a specific treatment plan.This allows the patient to live in a community during the treatment process rather than be confined to a hospital.If the patient is found in violation of the CTO he or she can be apprehended and placed in a hospital or related institution.This is a gross oversimplification of how CTOs work and the conditions they impose, but will suffice for this discussion.A great deal of published work on CTOs deals with their efficacy.These debates often reduce to squabbles over which methods are best for such an assessment (see the debate between Kisely and O'Reilly in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 2006) with no clear conclusion.The debates also take for granted the meaning of concepts fundamental to the discussion.For example, proponents of the CTO often refer to it as "a least restrictive alternative" (p.136) to institutionalization.Meanwhile, opponents typically muster around fears that CTOs will be used to force drugs on to individuals against their will, but this is often considered a rhetorical argument and countered by marshalling evidence of legislated protective mechanisms.Fabris questions what it means to be "restrictive," to "institutionalize," to "force," or to "choose," and whether legal mechanisms can in fact "protect" individuals.He addresses these issues in nine chapters which are broken down into subsections that make the discussion more structured and easy to follow. Tranquil Prisons begins on a snowy street in Vancouver whereFabris is told by a baker to stand outside, away from the view of customers.An ambulance arrives.He is transported to an emergency ward and escorted to a private room.He is distracted, excited; he is close to the meaning of
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".