Spaces of Exclusion: Safety, Stigma, and Surveillance of Mothers Experiencing Homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lack of affordable housing, poverty, and intimate partner violence are among the most common reasons for homelessness among mothers and their children in Canada. Mothers experience social exclusion in compounding and debilitating ways. In the literature on social exclusion and health, rarely is safety recognized as a prominent component of social exclusion. The purpose of this critical narrative study was to better understand the unique narratives of social exclusion for mothers experiencing homelessness in Ontario. A critical narrative methodology with an intersectional lens was used. Twenty-six ( N = 26) mothers participated in the study. The overarching finding of unsafe spaces represents the unique forms of exclusion from safety participants experienced in public and private spaces. Emerging out of this overarching category are two intertwined subcategories of (a) exclusion from safety and (b) stigma: public surveillance and discrimination. Participants’ narratives of exclusion from safety signify an ecosystem of unsafe spaces. The findings illuminate and reiterate the imperative for nurses to recognize that safety is a human right and is foundational for health. Nurses can use critical self-reflection and challenge the inherent “nursing gaze” to promote spaces of support rather than surveillance and engage in political advocacy to address structural inequalities, such as gender-based violence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".