Aboriginal Women and the Canadian Criminal Justice System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this policy review was to critically examine the Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS), which is a federal governmental program founded in 1991 to combat the problem of high rates of criminality in the Aboriginal population in Canada. Considering the high recidivism rates of AJS program participants, we suggest the AJS is not as effective in achieving its objectives. Looking at this strategy through a lens of structural social work, we found that it is inattentive to the impact of structural factors on criminality in some Aboriginal communities, groups, and individuals. Also, the strategy does not take into consideration gender-based factors that influence the interaction of Aboriginal men and women with the criminal justice system, which is profoundly different. Moreover, the strategy is inattentive to the five pathways that often bring Aboriginal women into contact with the criminal justice system - poverty, violence, sex trade, mental illness, and addiction. These pathways are inherently linked to the primary structures of colonialism, racism, and sexism, which continue to oppress Aboriginal women in Canada. For these reasons, we proposed that gender-based analysis would be useful for an improved understanding of these pathways. We also provided several recommendations for lowering the rates of crime committed by Aboriginal women, which include, state supported economic investments for community development, job creation, education attainment, and employability skills as well as policies against homelessness and supports for trauma, addictions, and mental health issues.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".