Justice and healing for victims of sexual abuse in Canadian Indian residential schools.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the impact of the Canadian criminal and civil justice processes on aboriginal people who are survivors of child sexual abuse in Canadian Indian residential schools. The focus of this thesis is whether legal processes meet the justice and healing needs of aboriginal victims of sexual abuse. In examining the impact of the justice system, an analysis of two court cases, namely the R. v. O'Connor criminal case and the Blackwater et al v. Plint et al (1998) civil case adjudication is presented. The O'Connor criminal case exemplifies the challenges victims face with substantial and procedural justice. In contrast, the Blackwater civil case exemplifies the problems victims face in demonstrating the responsibility or legal liability of the offending party or parties concerned, and in substantiating that they need to be compensated for their trauma and hardships. As the issues confronted by victims may be insurmountable, alternatives to mainstream justice have been sought. The alternatives take the form of aboriginal community justice initiatives. These present their own unique challenges and dilemmas for victims and their communities. However, victims appear to express hope for either community-based initiatives or a renewed justice system that will accommodate their cultural and individual rights. This is indicative of diversity regarding justice and healing needs of aboriginal victims. --Leaf i.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".