MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988913116 · doi:10.3138/cjwl.21.2.229

Shifting Rationales: The Waning Influence of Feminism on Canada’s Embryo Research Restrictions

2009· article· en· W1988913116 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. G. Backhouse, Maneesha Deckha

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Women and the Law/Revue Femmes et Droit · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionLegislatureLegislationContext (archaeology)CommissionReproductive technologyReproductionPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceFeminismSociologyLawEmbryoBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the competing influences on the federal government's policy and eventual legislative action regarding embryo research in Canada. Beginning with the events surrounding the establishment of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies, the article traces the diminishing importance of feminist rationales to the ultimate legislation regulating embryo research, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act. The article reveals the steady rise of pro-life discourse that has helped to displace feminist concerns about the threats to women’s bodies posed by new reproductive technologies in general and, instead, made the embryo the focus of legislative debates. As legal debates around abortion are relatively settled in Canada, the authors conclude that pro-life arguments are enjoying a level of respect in the embryo research context and a political and legal voice that has been denied in the abortion arena. The article ends by briefly raising questions regarding the discursive impact of this resurgence on attitudes towards abortion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Women and the Law/Revue Femmes et DroitSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207