(M)Others in Altered States: Prenatal Drug-Use, Risk, Choice, and Responsible Self-Governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is four-fold. Firstly, it is meant to draw attention to Project Prevention, an American-based program funded largely by private donations used to offer people — mostly poor, racialized, drug-using women — up to $200 for limiting their reproductive abilities. Secondly, it highlights links between Project Prevention’s mandate and prevailing discriminatory scientific-medical, legal, political, and media discourses which serve to constitute certain ‘Truths’ about the dangers of prenatal drug-use and parenthood, particularly for women. Thirdly, Project Prevention is framed and theorized within its neo-liberal context in order to underscore the ways that contemporary (pregnant) bodies often become governed through social initiatives which implode state/non-state agencies, public/private distinctions. Finally, to ensure readers are not left with overly simplistic readings of the issues at hand, the article concludes by considering the potential role of counterclaims in terms of who does and does not get constructed as a ‘risky’ reproductive agent.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".