The Lived Experience of Families With Children Who Have Sexually Offended in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Families with children who have sexually offended are often left to endure an issue that is heavily stigmatized among society. Research on the impact faced by families with children who have sexually offended is significantly limited. Overall, children who sexually offend are a heterogeneous population (Falligant et al., 2017; Fox & DeLisi, 2018). Based on the epidemiology of child sexual abuse, child sexual abuse of younger children is described as rather common, non-enduring, and often driven by factors that can be addressed by prevention efforts (Letourneau et al., 2017). Despite the noted heterogeneity within this population, the research efforts have historically been reductionist. A phenomenological method was used to answer the question: What is the lived experience of families with children who sexually offended in Canada? The findings indicated that the lived experience is distressing, it breaks and reshapes family dynamics, it evokes concerns for the child’s mental health and future, it involves navigating uncomfortable conversations, stigma, and lack of support. These findings are discussed in relation to the current literature.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".