Generative fathering: a framework for enriching understandings of fathers raising children who have disability diagnoses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theoretical frameworks that support understandings of fathering children who have disability diagnoses are under-developed. The purpose of this theoretical paper is to present the generative fathering framework, interfaced with critical disability studies theory (CDS), for enriching understandings of fathering children with disability diagnoses. The authors introduce generative fathering, and follow this with an examination of the generative fathering assumptions: (1) fathers are responsible for meeting children’s needs through a ‘variety’ of fatherwork, (2) father–child connection results in a reciprocity of benefits, and (3) fathers’ strengths are cultivated amidst challenges – which is argued to be distinctly relevant to fathering in relation to children with disability diagnoses. A sample of relevant literature is drawn together to direct the discussion and to elaborate how the generative fathering framework can be informed by CDS to guide fuller understandings of fathering children with disability diagnoses.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it