Forced Separation and Intercountry Adoption: The Invisible Narrative of the War in Lebanon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’adoption d’un enfant a toujours été perçue comme un conte de fées selon lequel les couples, qui n’ont pas eu la chance d’avoir leurs propres enfants, choisiraient de sauver la vie d’enfants abandonnés ou orphelins. Cependant, un nombre croissant d’individus adoptés dans le monde entier expriment maintenant leur mécontentement face aux arrangements qui les ont déracinés de leurs origines. Ils partagent des histoires d’identités perdues et aspirent à renouer avec leurs parents biologiques, en particulier leurs mères qui sont souvent blâmées et stigmatisées. Cet article vise à montrer que l’adoption internationale dans le cadre de la guerre du Liban ne visait pas uniquement à sauver des enfants innocents et à leur offrir de meilleures perspectives. En comparant le cas libanais à l’histoire internationale de la séparation forcée, en particulier l’expérience des peuples autochtones au Canada, cet article explore les récits partagés par les adoptés dans un effort visant à documenter l’un des aspects invisibles de la guerre civile libanaise.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".