Châtiments corporels sur les enfants : conséquences légales au Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La revue des plus récentes études psychosociales et neurologiques révèle sans équivoque que les châtiments corporels constituent une méthode de discipline qui est non seulement inefficace et sans effet bénéfique, mais qui pose au contraire un risque important d’effets préjudiciables à court, moyen et long terme pour les enfants, notamment en raison de leurs impacts négatifs sur leur santé physique et mentale de même que sur leur développement. D’autre part, l’analyse de la jurisprudence en lien avec les châtiments corporels depuis Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law c. Canada [2004] 1 RCS 76 démontre qu’en vertu de l’article 43 du Code criminel, la protection accordée aux parents canadiens qui utilisent ces méthodes de discipline est extrêmement limitée devant les tribunaux canadiens, puisque les critères stricts établis dans cet arrêt rendent cette défense pratiquement inapplicable. Pour ces raisons, la légitimité de l’article 43 du Code criminel doit être remise en cause.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".