Gendered Treatment: Girls and Treatment Orders in Bail Court
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, girls, more so than boys, have been the recipients of rehabilitative efforts within the youth justice system. While the rehabilitative focus of youth justice legislation has diminished over the decades, there is still concern that girls may be more likely than boys to be recipients of treatment-based responses. We investigated this at the pre-trial stage, examining bail conditions placed on youths. Examining a sample of bail cases from a large youth court in Toronto, extending from April 2003 through to December 2008, we found that girls were significantly more likely than boys to be given a condition of attending a “treatment program,” especially if the offence was a minor non-violent offence. While the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) is very clear that youths cannot be detained or sentenced to custody for child welfare reasons (ss. 29 and 39(5)), there is nothing that explicitly prohibits the imposition of “rehabilitative” bail conditions. While the paternalistic treatment/rehabilitation efforts from earlier in the twentieth century may have faded considerably ( Sprott and Doob 2009 ), they appear to cast a long shadow, especially over girls in the bail process.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".