MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025338548 · doi:10.1002/ijgo.13197

Paid surrogacy abroad does not violate public policy: UK Supreme Court

2020· article· en· W3025338548 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard M. Dickens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtAppealLawPolitical scienceLegislatureCompensation (psychology)Government (linguistics)Public policyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In April 2020, the United Kingdom Supreme Court upheld compensation for a woman whose negligent medical care had left her dependent on surrogate motherhood (SM) to have a family, even though SM might be by lawful commercial services in California, USA. Paid SM is criminal in the UK. Altruistic SM arrangements are legal, but unenforceable. The trial judge felt bound by precedent to disallow compensation for lawful commercial SM abroad, as contrary to public policy. The Court of Appeal reversed this ruling, since public policy is not immutable, and had changed. The Supreme Court agreed, acknowledging an evolution in popular attitudes concerning what a family is, and how it might be formed. Government policy was observed to accommodate SM in suitable cases. Movement was perceived towards legislative reform, and judicial recognition of paid SM arrangements abroad that are not exploitative or abusive of surrogates, commissioning parents, or resulting children was considered appropriate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207