MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473269292

Support for Adult Children in Canada: When Does Childhood End?

2016· article· en· W2473269292 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicholas Bala, Sarah Spitz

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationLegislationChild supportPolitical scienceSocial supportIncome SupportPsychologyLawSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the provisions of the federal Divorce Act and provincial legislation like Ontario’s Family Law Act that impose an obligation on separated or divorced parents to support adult children, and review leading cases interpreting this legislation. While this remains a contentious and discretionary area, there are some clear trends in the case law. Social and economic changes have resulted in “delayed adulthood;” young adults are living with their parents longer as well as looking to parents for financial support for increasing periods of post-secondary education. These changes are reflected in judicial attitudes to support of adult children whose parents have separated or divorced: compared to two decades ago, Canadian courts are recognizing a greater and longer obligation to provide support for adult children. For higher income payors, this may extend to support for a professional degree or further education after an undergraduate degree, with support until the mid-twenties. When an adult child has a disability and continues to reside with one parent and receive care and support from that parent, the courts may extend the support obligation into the late 20’s and beyond, though social assistance and disability pensions will be taken into account in setting the amount of this obligation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207