Bibliographic record
Abstract
In R. (on the application of Axon) v. Secretary of State for Health & Another , the English High Court affirmed that “ the duty of confidentiality owed to a person under 16, in any setting, is the same as that owed to any other person .” Young women are entitled to seek and receive sexual health care, including abortion care, without parental notification. The Court resolved the case primarily by reference to the “mature minor” rule, first developed in Gillick v. West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA and another . The rule states that a young person can give consent valid in law provided he or she has sufficient maturity and intelligence to understand the nature and implications of the proposed care. The Court reasoned that a logical relationship exists between the capacity to consent and the right to do so in privacy. Parental notification contradicted the mature minor rule and was inconsistent with Gillick . Evidence that without the guarantee of confidentiality young persons may be deterred from seeking care confirmed the rule as good public policy. Axon is also a constitutional case, reflecting a legal landscape that has changed drastically since Gillick was decided more than twenty years ago. Most significant is the introduction of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ( ECHR ), which strengthened the language of competing rights and state interests in the English legal system.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| 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".