Assessing access for prospective adoptive parents living with HIV: an environmental scan of Ontario’s adoption agencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Work has been underway to increase the availability of parenting options for people living with and affected by HIV. One option, adoption, has not yet been explored in the literature. The study aimed to gain a better understanding of the potential of adoption for individuals/couples living with HIV in Ontario, and to assess potential structural barriers or facilitators that may impact their experience navigating the adoption system by conducting an environmental scan of adoption service providers in Ontario. A list of adoption service providers was compiled using the Ontario government's website. Information relevant to the study's measures was collected using service providers' websites. Service providers without websites, or with websites that did not address all of the research measures, were contacted via telephone to complete a structured interview. Online data extraction was possible for 2 and telephone surveys were completed with 75 adoption service providers (total n = 77). Most service providers reported that HIV status is not an exclusion criterion for prospective parents (64%). However, more than one-fifth of the participants acknowledged they were not sure if people with HIV were eligible to adopt. Domestic service providers were the only providers who did not report knowledge of restrictions due to HIV status. Private domestic adoption presented social barriers as birth parent(s) of a child can access health records of a prospective parent and base their selection of an adoptive parent based on health status. Adoption practitioners and licensees involved in international adoptions reported the most structural barriers for prospective parent(s) living with HIV, attributed to the regulations established by the host country of the child(ren) eligible for adoption. Although international adoptions may present insurmountable barriers for individuals living with HIV, public and private domestic adoption appears to be a viable option.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".