Children’s Views Are Not Taken Into Account in Accordance With Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the Family Talk Intervention When a Parent Is Cared for in Palliative Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having a parent with a life-threatening illness is challenging throughout the illness trajectory, and for some also in bereavement. Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states a child's right to express their opinion and have it respected in processes that affect them. The aims of this paper were to explore the child's active participation in a family support programme, the Family Talk Intervention, in accordance with Article 12, when having a parent cared for in palliative care. Twenty families with 50 children participated. Fieldnotes were taken during the programme and later analysed with interpretive descriptions. The study shows that all children were listened to, but only a quarter reached the minimum point required in Article 12, where their views were taken into account. The Family Talk Intervention in palliative care would benefit from implementing a child-centred approach in order for all children to be active participants.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".