Help or hindrance? A narrative exploration of the familial relationships of an indigenous woman living in Northern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, Indigenous women and parents have been over-represented in the homeless \npopulation (Menzies, 2006). Relatively little is known about the experiences, perspectives and \nneeds of this population (Shaikh, Kauppi, Pallard, & Gervais, 2013). This narrative study \nuncovers the family life experiences of an Indigenous woman given the pseudonym “Sam”; she \nwas living in Northern Ontario and had experienced homelessness. Both the Listening Guide, a \nqualitative voice-centered relational method of inquiry based on the work of Carol Gilligan, and \ntraditional Cree Medicine Wheel teachings were utilized to analyze data. Results indicate that \nfamily members played roles both supportive and unsupportive to Sam. Family members were \ninstrumental in the genesis of homelessness for Sam and in facilitating transitions into housing. \nI-poems derived from interviews with Sam reveal aspects of life in stages from childhood \nthrough to elder, and illustrate her relationships with immediate family (mother, father, siblings, \nson), extended family members (grandmother, aunts, cousins, grandchildren), partners and \nfriends. The findings support the view that changes in social work practice and policy are \nrequired to ensure that services are culturally safe and relevant for Indigenous peoples, and allow \nfor the full inclusion of family members and varied relationships within the lives of women \nliving with homelessness.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".