Psychiatric Survivors/Consumers Die and Nothing Is Done: An Examination of the Discriminatory Nature of the Ontario Coroner’s Act
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through a critical examination of the Ontario Coroners Act, this paper reveals the expansive loopholes within the legislation disallowing public inquests in regards to the deaths of Mad people held in police custody, psychiatric hospitals and correctional facilities. The lethal abuses and rights violations occurring within the system are neither oversights nor technicalities, but rather are a result of the standard procedures and applications of the Coroners Act. An in-depth investigation of cases mandated under the legislation, further demonstrates how these deaths are attended to with a level of ambiguity, along with an expansive and arbitrary interpretation of the Coroners Act, providing ample leeway to disregard holding open, public, and transparent inquests, is evidence that these deaths remain improperly investigated, if they are at all. Legislative change to the Coroners Act is urgently required in order to have these deaths seriously investigated and to prevent the continuation of psychiatric consumers/survivors dying suspiciously under the control of the state.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".