Aboriginal Grandmothers Caring for Grandchildren: Located in a Policy Gap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article argues that the Saskatchewan child welfare system is providing fragmented, inconsistent, and insufficient support to Aboriginal Grandmothers caring for grandchildren. This article is based on a Participatory Action Research project grounded in Indigenous epistemologies, which involved Aboriginal Grandmothers caring for grandchildren. Traditionally, child rearing was an expected and well-supported role of Aboriginal Grandmothers. Today the situation is very different. The Aboriginal Grandmothers involved in this project are carrying the responsibility rearing their grandchildren because the parents’ cannot. As a result of colonial policies and practices, in particular the Residential School policy and the ““Sixties Scoop”,” many Aboriginal families are facing situations of crisis and ill health, such as drug or alcohol abuse, domestic abuse, and incarceration. Further, these Aboriginal Grandmothers are not provided with sufficient and consistent financial support from the child welfare system. Community services and supports for Aboriginal Grandmothers are also lacking and those available are often difficult to access. Also, many Grandmothers expressed fear and distrust of the child welfare system and some related experiences where they felt judged or bullied. On November 9 th of 2009, the Saskatchewan government announced that they would be conducting an extensive review of the province’s child welfare system. As a part of this review, the Grandmothers caring for grandchildren Support Network took their concerns to the committee. While the report has not been released to the public yet, we hope that this report will lead to policies that better support Aboriginal Grandmothers so that they and their children can access what they need to live a healthy life.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".