Culture Loss and Crumbling Skulls: The Problematic of Injury in Residential School Litigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the relationship that emerged between injury and indigeneity in a recent residential school lawsuit in Canada.In Blackwater v. Plint (2001, 2003, 2005),several former residential school students sued Canada and the United Church for injuries they sustained as a result of sexual and physical abuse, neglect, and forced assimilation at the Alberni Indian Residential School. The plaintiffs argued that their loss of culture and language was an injury for which Canada and the United Church should be held liable. During the trial these plaintiffs tried to construct an uninjured aboriginality as normative prior to attending the residential school. Church and government lawyers, however, reified aboriginality in a way that made injury the true difference that resides in aboriginal people and something for which the plaintiffs rather than the government or church were to blame. This article shows how the logic of tort law combined with existing assumptions about aboriginal people to facilitate these arguments. Throughout, the article draws attention to the importance of the law and legal processes as sites for the negative construction of aboriginality.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".