Le Passé De L’Adopté Aux Frontières Du Droit (The Adoptee's Past at Law's Frontiers)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte prend l’adoption domestique en exemple afin de mieux comprendre l’identite des institutions qui la reglementent. Nous nous pencherons sur deux frontieres : celle entre le droit civil et le common law et celle, dans chacune de ces deux traditions, entre le juridique et la pratique sociale. Nous nous baserons sur la discussion scientifique et judiciaire de l’acces de l’enfant a son passe. Il sera question de l’adoption ouverte, qui releve de plusieurs juridictions de common law, et d’une proposition du legislateur quebecois afin d’introduire une forme d’adoption simple. Ensuite, nous etudierons le discours judiciaire et doctrinal au sujet de ces moyens afin d’en tirer quelques constats provisoires relatifs aux attentes a l’egard du droit de l’adoption. Cette analyse donnera lieu a l’hypothese suivant laquelle les civilistes soulignent, davantage que ne le font leurs homologues du common law, l’importance du lien juridique afin d’honorer les origines de l’adopte. Enfin, elargissant notre regard, nous reflechirons sur les rapports qu’entretiennent les traditions juridiques de droit civil et de common law avec le non-droit. Quoiqu’il apparaisse que le droit civil peine a reconnaitre des pratiques sociales hors de ses propres categories, une lecture fouillee du regime de l’adoption et un rappel d’un courant minoritaire au sujet de la coutume nuanceront le portrait.The paper investigates adopted children's access to information about their past in the civil law and common law. Specifically, taking a reform process underway in Quebec as chief case study, it explores open adoption, already familiar to many common-law jurisdictions, and a proposal to add a new form of simple adoption to Quebec law. Then it examines judicial and scholarly discussion of those legal pathways in order to draw out expectations of adoption law. More than their common-law counterparts, civilians emphasize the importance of the legal bond for recognizing the adoptee's origins. Last, the paper reflects on the civil law's and common law's respective relations with non-law. If the prevalent approach within the civil law struggles to recognize social practices outside its legal categories, a minority current of civilian attention to custom is nevertheless part of the tradition.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".