Du peche au traumatisme : L'inceste, vu de la cour des jeunes delinquants et de la cour du bien-etre social de Montreal, 1912-1965
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La protection des enfants négligés et en danger faisait partie des attributions de la Cour des jeunes délinquants et de la Cour du bien-être social de Montréal. Un échantillon de 251 dossiers familiaux a permis d'étudier le problème de l'inceste en milieu urbain. Les statistiques confirment la prédominance des liaisons entre pères et filles. L'approche qualitative révèle différents types d'inceste, causés soit par une organisation familiale patriarcale; un désir de substitution, de compensation, d'initiation sexuelle; la pédophilie ou l'homosexualité. Une évolution se produit dans la réaction des intervenants : juges, officiers de probation, psychiatres et psychologues. Au début, ils perçoivent l'inceste comme une faute morale (décennies 1910 et 1920). Puis, à partir de 1930, ils s'inquiètent de ses répercussions sociales. Enfin, vers 1950, ils découvrent le traumatisme psychique causé par l'abus sexuel. The protection of neglected children and those in peril was assigned to both the Juvenile Court and the Social Welfare Court of Montreal. In order to examine the problem of incest in an urban setting, 251 family case files were used as a study sample. Statistics confirm the prevalence of father/daughter sexual relations. The qualitative approach used in the study reveals differing types of incest caused by a number of factors: the patriarchal family unit; the desire for substitution, compensation, or sexual initiation; pedophilia; or homosexuality. The way in which those associated with the courts or those who became involved in these cases – judges, probation officers, psychiatrists, and psychologists – respond to incest slowly evolves: from perceiving incest as a moral sin (1910s and 1920s), to worrying about the social repercussions of incest (1930s), and finally to discovering the psychological trauma caused by sexual abuse (1950s).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".