Commodification and the allocation of care and responsibility for children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author examines selected cases in three contexts that raise issues related to the commodification of child care and custodial authority. In traditional legal terms, the cases examined deal directly or indirectly with issues of standing and the best interests of children and, in the third context, with claims of discrimination. All three scenarios involve claims by persons who were neither birth nor adoptive parents of the children in question and thus cared for children outside the bounds of conventional family formations and traditional sources of parental authority. All three contexts raise questions regarding the implications of a cash nexus and contractual basis for the care of children. The author argues that the significance of commodification or a cash or contractual nexus must be assessed contextually and identifies specific factors within each context that should have a bearing on the legal implications of commodification. However, the contradictions for caregivers and risks of disrupted attachments for children can only be fully addressed by changing the background conditions of care.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".