Ethics, Gender & Sexual Orientation: Moving Beyond Tolerance to Acceptance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter ten deals with the somewhat sensitive subject matter of ethics, gender and sexual orientation. Nurses are encouraged to move beyond tolerance and to accept and respect life choices that differ from their own. The issue of gender style and ethical decision-making is reviewed. It is pointed out that male ways of approaching moral decision-making may be different from females but not inferior to them. The reasons why Canadian nurses are still primarily women is explored. Nurses are obligated to have a working knowledge of the varying forms of sexual and gender orientation and they are not allowed to discriminate against any individual for any reason. It is pointed out that members who identify as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender, queer or questioning their sexual identity, or 2 spirit (LGBTQ2S) are often victims of both acute and chronic trauma. They are often not well understood or treated by members of the health community. Nurses are advised to become familiar with treatment guidelines in order to more effectively manage gender assessments. A strategy to foster compassion is recommended. The Chapter ends with a Case in Point: When Coming Out Seems to Cost too much.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".