Indigenous Fathering and Wellbeing: Kinship and Decolonial Approaches to Health Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past decade, Canadian statistics indicate that fathering nurtures family wellbeing which ultimately fosters community growth. The wellbeing of Indigenous men, shaped by determinants of health and culture-based perspectives, is challenged by ongoing settler colonialism. In particular to Indigenous men living with children in their homes, less is known about their strengths as nurturers. For the purpose of this study, based on Indigenist, decolonizing theories, 'father' is not conceived as the head of household. An alternative to the heteropatriarchal model is the kinship orientation of Indigenous fathering and as such, father refers to uncle, grandfather, traditional Clan leader, adoptive parent, and so on. This study's secondary quantitative analysis compared health and social characteristics of three cohorts of Indigenous adult men who identify as residing with children. Based on an extracted subset of variables from the 2012 Aboriginal Peoples Survey, results showed many significance comparisons among First Nations, Metis and Inuit men. Across health and social domains, multiple and decolonial supports are needed for Indigenous fathering to flourish.
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 | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".