Proceeding with 'Care': Lessons to Be Learned from the Canadian Parental Leave and Quebec Daycare Initiatives in Developing a National Childcare Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During June 2004 and January 2006 federal election campaigns, Liberal Party promised creation of a universal, accessible childcare policy. Given current scarcity of affordable, quality childcare throughout country, this promise was, quite predictably, warmly received. At same time, discussions about a national childcare policy raised important questions about ensuring universality of accessible, quality care for children. Such issues have yet to be seriously deliberated in academic, public and political discussions regarding development of national childcare. This paper seeks to address questions about effectiveness of federal involvement in early child education and care through analysis of two other legislative initiatives created to support families with young children: federal parental leave benefit policy established through Employment Insurance Act, and Quebec's universal childcare program. An examination of these two initiatives reveals that each is premised on specific assumptions about the and its social, cultural and economic dynamics. Yet these assumptions fail to reflect realities of many families and, where this occurs, parents and their children are often denied state-supported benefits. Clearly, design of a national childcare policy should seek to avoid such marginalization of families. This paper thus maintains that assumptions underpinning Canada's parental leave policy and Qu?bec's daycare initiative cannot serve as premise for a national childcare program that might ultimately be created. Instead, this essay offers a new way of envisioning family relationships and responsibilities, work, and childcare, with a view to promoting development of an equitable and inclusive Canadian childcare policy.
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 | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".