MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951987241 · doi:10.29173/alr2526

The Harms Caused: A Narrative of Intergenerational Responsibility

2019· article· en· W2951987241 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedressWitnessEconomic JusticeContext (archaeology)Settlement (finance)Dispute resolutionIndigenousNarrativeSociologyCompensation (psychology)LawPolitical scienceCriminologyPsychologySocial psychologyBusinessHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Born out of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, the Independent Assessment Process is a program that provides monetary compensation to former students who suffered sexual and physical abuse at Indian Residential Schools. As “Canada’s Representative” during hearings of the Independent Assessment Process, this author, a young lawyer at the time, bore witness to grizzly accounts of acts perpetrated against claimants that left her unsettled. Unsettled by what was heard, yes, but also in her observations that the process did not satisfy the needs of all claimants, nor did it engage with her own sense of responsibility as a non-Indigenous Canadian.
 The author weaves together her experiences and observations as “Canada’s Representative” to explore intergenerational justice in a Canadian setting, and what processes might offer a more complete approach in handling the Indian Residential Schools legacy. First, shecanvasses the existing framework of dispute settlement in the context of Indian Residential Schools, namely criminal, tort, and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. While pointing out the strengths these mechanisms do have to address some of the harms of Indian Residential Schools, she ultimately suggests their inherent legal limitations make them inadequate tools to provide redress to victims and engage society more broadly.
 The author goes on to define transitional justice, set out its established tenets and themes, and begins to map out a Canadian application of these principles to the Indian Residential Schools policy by drawing on examples from Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. These principles take shape as innovative instruments for advancing the goals of reconciliation and of Canadian society. They are not without their own flaws, however, as the author also points out, that may affect how Canadians—in particular, non-Indigenous Canadians—view their legitimacy.
 Lastly, the author analyzes prevailing views of societal responsibility to provide a normative underpinning for intergenerational justice in a Canadian context. She concludes by advocating Canadians move from a stance of guilt and blame toward one of a broad assumption of responsibility as they continue to grapple with the legacy of Indian Residential Schools.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.364 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it