In Defence of Reason: Religion, Science, and the Prince Edward Island Anti-Abortion Movement, 1969–1988
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the Prince Edward Island Right to Life Association (RTLA) lobbied medical professionals, hospital boards, politicians, and neighbours to prevent the Charlottetown and Summerside hospital corporations, the only abortion providers on the Island, to eliminate their Therapeutic Abortion Committees. Because abortion committees were not mandatory and only hospital boards were responsible for establishing committees at accredited hospitals, the RTLA elected pro-life members to the boards and voted against abortion committee bylaws to establish barriers to abortion access. By holding key positions within the hospital corporations, pro-life activists ensured that abortion provisions were no longer legally or medically permissible in Island hospitals. This article draws on RTLA and government records, newspaper articles, as well as interviews with pro-life activists, to highlight the avenues through which the organization created a prominent social movement. By contesting the scientific reasoning for abortion, the RTLA quickly became a countermovement not only to the pro-choice movement, but also to the mainstream medical community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".