Advancing Reproductive Justice to Close the Health Gap: A Call to Action for Social Work
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reproductive justice is an intersectional social movement, theory, and praxis well aligned with social work's mission and values. Yet, advancing reproductive justice-the right to have children, to not have children, to parent with safety and dignity, and to sexual and bodily autonomy-has not been a signature area of scholarship and practice for the field. This article argues that it is critical for social work to advance reproductive justice to truly achieve the grand challenge of closing the health gap. The article starts by discussing the history and tenets of reproductive justice and how it overlaps with social work ethics. The authors then highlight some of the ways by which social workers have been disruptors of and complicit in the oppression of individuals, families, and communities with regard to their reproductive rights and outcomes. The article concludes with a call to action and recommendations for social work to foreground reproductive justice in research, practice, and education efforts by centering marginalized voices while reimagining the field's pursuit of health equity.
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.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it