Solving an Appalling Problem: Social Reformers and the Campaign for the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act, 1928
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the author examines the campaign leading up to the passage of the Sexual Sterilization Act in Alberta in 1928. The author asserts that the passage of this Act was the result of the influence of a few elite individuals, particularly those involved with the United Farm Women of Alberta social reform movement, and may not have been reflective of widespread favourable public sentiment. While there were serious misgivings regarding the passage of the Sexual Sterilization Act, the legislation was ultimately successful because of the pressing problems of inadequate mental facilities and budgetary constraints. The author discusses the legislation's eventual repeal in 1972 due to public denunciation of eugenic measures, concerns about liability, and the threat posed to individual liberties. This article was the winner of the William Morrow Essay Contest in 1999.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".