MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498238348

Pursuing the Perfect Mother: Why America's Criminalization of Maternal Substance Abuse is Not the Answer- A Compartive Legal Analysis

2009· article· en· W2498238348 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda C. Fentiman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminalizationCriminologySubstance abusePsychologySubstance useChild custodyPolitical scienceLawPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Article the author will examine not only the substantive legal differences between the United States, Canada, and France, but will also explore how these legal rules fit within a broader social, political, and religious setting. This Article will pursue four lines of inquiry. First, it will briefly chronicle the history of criminal prosecution of pregnant women in America and show how these prosecutions have become markedly more aggressive over the last twenty years. Second, it will situate these prosecutions in the full context of American law and culture, demonstrating how the fetus has received increasing legal recognition in a wide variety of circumstances. The author will argue here that "fetal protection" prosecutions are part of a broader attack on women's rights, including the right to reproductive freedom as well as the right to control their economic and private lives generally. The Article will examine how American laws focus on the fetus as the sole "person" at risk, rather than on the maternal-fetal dyad, skews the legal and political arguments that take place. It will contrast the emphasis on the fetus with the failure of American government to provide adequate health care for women and children. Third, it will examine the laws of two other nations, Canada and France, for purposes of comparative legal, cultural, and economic analysis, and will offer some informed speculation about the reasons why the American obsession with "fetal protection" is not matched by other nations. Here the Article will address four factors: 1) America's frequent reliance on constitutional litigation as a means of achieving law change; 2) America's federal system of government, which provides the opportunity for different legal rules to operate concurrently within the same nation; 3) the United States' unique prosecution system, which involves government attorneys who are chosen locally by the electorate, as opposed to the Canadian and French systems in which prosecutors are appointed through a centralized national process; and 4) and the lack of a system of universal health care and other government-funded social and economic supports. The Author will conclude with recommendations for reforming American law to embrace the unity of interests of pregnant women and their fetuses and promote the health of both, by providing treatment, not punishment, for addicted women.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.035
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesFrench-language works237,207