Coming Out in Canada: The Immigration of Same-Sex Couples Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While Canadian immigration policy has long favoured family reunification, until recently, Canadian immigration laws allowed only married heterosexual Canadians to sponsor their spouses as family class immigrants. The recently enacted Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and the accompanying Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, have expanded the family class to allow gay men and lesbians to formally sponsor their partners. In this article, the author argues that despite the important progress made in recognizing gay and lesbian conjugal relationships under the new legislation, the issue of same-sex immigration remains problematic. The author examines the legislative scheme to reveal that the new family class categories still contain policy and drafting weaknesses that could hinder same-sex immigration. In addition, while the new legislation offers a better regime than existed previously, gay men and lesbians remain vulnerable to discriminatory applications of the law if visa officers, members of the Immigration Division, and Federal Court judges do not recognize the political, social, and cultural specificity of gay and lesbian couples who apply for permanent residency in Canada. Alors que la politique canadienne sur l'immigration a longtemps favorise la reunification familiale, jusqu'a tout recemment, Le droit de l'immigration permettait exclusivement aux repondants heterosexuels de parrainer la demande d'immigration de leur conjoint en vertu de la categorie regroupement familial. Nouvellement edictee, la Loi sur l'immigration et la protection des refugies et le Reglement sur l'immigration et la protection des refugies a finalement elargi la categorie de la famille pour y inclure les couples gais et lesbien, heur permettant ainsi de parrainer officiellement leur conjoint. L'auteure de cet article constate qu'en depit du progres important qu'entraine la nouvelle loi vis-a-vis la reconnaissance des relations conjugales homosexuelles, la question de l'immigration des couples de meme sexe demeure problematique. Dans son examen du nouveau regime legislatif, l'auteure demontre que la categorie regroupement familial preserve certaines faiblesses tant au niveau de la politique que de la redaction, qui risquent forcement d'entraver l'immigration des couples de meme sexe. Entre autre, la vulnerabilite des gals et les lesbiennes face a l'application discriminatoire de la loi persistera si les agents de visa, commissaires de la Section d'immigration et juges de la Cour federale ne reconnaissent pas la particularite politique, sociale et culturelle des couples homosexuels qui font demande pour L'obtention du statut de resident permanent au Canada.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it