MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189016622

Disability, Displacement, and the Biopolitics of Belonging

2020· article· en· W3189016622 on OpenAlex
Natalie Spagnuolo

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Identity, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGovernmentalityCitizenshipImmigrationSociologyGovernment (linguistics)RefugeeGender studiesPolitical sciencePublic relationsPoliticsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation is concerned with the multiple ways in which formal and substantive citizenship are regulated among migrants with disabilities and non-migrants with intellectual disabilities. The focus of this analysis is twofold and is centred on medicalized assessment practices supported by government agencies at the federal and provincial level. These are Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and Ontarios Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS). A multi-layered and historically informed analysis that reads first-person interviews alongside legislative and policy developments situates lived experiences with assessment regimes within a broader theoretical discussion of displacement. First, access to developmental services among adults with intellectual disabilities in Ontario is addressed, with a special focus on the MCSS Passport Program and Ontarios implementation of the Supports Intensity Scale. Immigration medical testing and particularly the IRCCs medical inadmissibility criteria are then considered in detail. While careful attention is given to the unique ways in which immigration medical testing and developmental services assessments are experienced, these examples are treated through an integrated analysis that draws upon the inter-related concepts of (in)capacity and (under)development. 
\nThe framework forwarded in this study suggests that hierarchical understandings of (in)capacity and (under)development organize opportunities for belonging in translocal and transnational contexts, impacting migrants with disabilities and non-migrants with intellectual disabilities. A governmentality of (in)capacity that emphasizes the intersectional potential of intellectual disability is proposed as a means of exploring decision-making within and across these contexts. To account for the similarities as well as the differences between various modes of exclusion, this study also builds upon previous work in critical migration and critical disability studies, contributing to the development of a displacement framework that encompasses spatial and subjective dimensions of translocal and transnational disability experiences. Through this framework, lived experiences with Canadian immigration practices and Ontario developmental services are analyzed to reveal how diverse and deeply marginalized but by no means mutually exclusive communities can be placed at risk of displacement.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.194 · 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