Les femmes et le travail de soins aux enfants : quelle reconnaissance par les régimes étatiques d'indemnisation ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore le traitement réservé au travail non rémunéré de soins aux enfants par les trois principaux régimes étatiques d'indemnisation des lésions au Québec, soit celui des accidentés de la route, des accidentés du travail et des victimes d'actes criminels. Dans un premier temps, l'auteure présente brièvement les trois régimes et expose les principales dispositions permettant une compensation pour la perte de capacité à prendre soin d'un enfant. Dans un deuxième temps, elle examine la jurisprudence qui accorde ou non des indemnités ou remboursements pour frais de garde d'enfant. Enfin, l'auteure conclut à la timide reconnaissance du travail de soins aux enfants par les régimes étatiques d'indemnisation. La Loi sur l'assurance automobile est celle qui le reconnaît davantage, mais le dédommagement prévu en pareil cas demeure faible, tandis que les deux autres lois renferment des dispositions trop restrictives qui ne trouvent pratiquement jamais application.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".