Migrant Domestic Work and Changes in the Ideas of Childcare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of care-giving as an international resource, and the consequent generalization of migrant domestic work, has led to new ways and possibilities of family care. The ideal ways of caring are culturally and historically constructed, and the social changes of the last decades have given rise to new approaches to care. Care has become a resource with no national boundaries which has resulted in new family structures, perceptions of motherhood, and ways of organizing social reproductive tasks, both for the migrant and native families. Research done in Spain shows that there has been an expansion in the paid domestic sector and, therefore, changes in the approach to childcare in both of the families involved: the native employer’s and the migrant employee’s. The idea of intensive care in the mother-child relation no longer constitutes the only desirable model, as care has evolved from a “time spent together” to a matter of emotional and social guidance. The strategies used by the actors involved in these new forms of doing motherhood, nevertheless, vary according to national origins and access to social and economic resources. Differences between natives and migrant families can be found in relation to the managing of time devoted to children, as well as to the distribution of maternal responsibilities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".