MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159254874

Le calcul des aliments du parent de fait : de I'approche synchronique à I'approche étapiste (Calculating the Support Paid by a De Facto Parent: Moving from a Synchronic to a Layered Approach)

2019· article· fr· W3159254874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michaël Lessard

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologyPhilosophySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French Abstract: Le present article porte sur le calcul des aliments verses par les parents de fait en droit quebecois. Il se divise en quatre parties. Dans la premiere, l'auteur explique dans quelle mesure les parents de fait quebecois peuvent etre tenus de fournir des aliments en vertu de la doctrine in loco parentis qui s'applique aux couples maries. Dans la deuxieme partie, il detaille la methode prevue en droit prive federal pour calculer les aliments payables par une personne tenant lieu de parent. Dans la troisieme, l'auteur emet l'hypothese selon laquelle le droit civil quebecois preconise une approche synchronique de calcul des aliments payables par les parents de fait et les parents civils non gardiens. Enfin, dans la quatrieme partie, il recommande l'adoption d'une approche etapiste pour le calcul des pensions alimentaires. Selon l'approche etapiste, l'obligation alimentaire du parent de fait est subsidiaire a celle du parent civil. La pension alimentaire de ce dernier est d'abord determinee sans prendre en consideration le parent de fait. Celle du parent de fait est ensuite evaluee suivant les regles habituelles mais, pour obtenir sa valeur reelle, on lui soustrait le montant verse par le parent civil: la pension du parent de fait devient complementaire de la pension du parent civil. Le parent civil est donc soumis a une obligation primaire et le parent de fait, a une obligation secondaire. Cette approche comporte quatre avantages: 1) elle favorise la stabilite de la situation financiere de l'enfant; 2) elle temoigne du role exerce par le parent de fait au cours de la vie commune; 3) elle permet d'eviter des injustices envers le parent civil gardien; et 4) elle favorise la preservation de l'institution de la filiation. English Abstract: This article aims to explain the shortcomings of Quebec law regarding the calculation of child support when paid by a de facto parent, and to present an alternative. Part I discusses the extent to which Quebec de facto parents are required to pay child support under the doctrine of in loco parentis. Part II outlines how child support is calculated under federal private law when payable by a person standing in the place of a parent. In Part III, I put forward the hypothesis that Quebec law imposes a synchronic approach to the calculation of child support when a de facto parent is involved. Last, in Part IV, I recommend the adoption of a layered approach to the calculation of child support. Under this layered approach, the support obligation of a de facto parent is subsidiary to the obligation of the civil parent. First, the amount of child support paid by the civil parent is determined without considering the de facto parent. Then, the support obligation of the de facto parent is assessed using the usual rules. To obtain the real value of the de facto parent's support obligation, the civil parent's support must be subtracted, making the de facto parent's contribution complementary to the contribution of the civil parent. The civil parent has a primary obligation, while the de facto parent has a secondary obligation. There are four advantages to this approach: (1) it helps ensure financial stability for the child, (2) it reflects the role played by the de facto parent during cohabitation, (3) it helps avoid unfairness towards the custodial civil parent, and (4) it helps preserve the institution of filiation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207