Towards a Post-Social Right to Life, Liberty and Security of the Person Through Markets? Conceptions of Citizenship and the Implications for Health Law as Governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of increased expectations of healthcare services and fiscal pressures, rights claims constitute a force pushing for privatization and thus threaten Canada’s single-tier public system. This article introduces the concept of a ‘post-social right’ to understand the current legal effort to enforce a right to healthcare derivative of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Commonly considered as a ‘negative’ right, I suggest that the right also has positive capacity. Rather than simply protecting against unjust state intervention, section 7 claims valorize a particular mode of sustaining life, liberty and security of the person according to neo-liberal principles. A right to markets in healthcare aligns health law with the logic of prudentialism as a technology of governance. As the enforceability of the right expands and strengthens, health law as governance operates to normalize market solutions to health matters. It follows that a form of two-tier citizenship arises, dividing ‘activated’ citizens from the ‘inactive’.
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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.119 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".