Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although exactly how Canadian courts would rule in cases concerning the foregoing of life-sustaining treatment for extremely preterm infants is uncertain, there are some recent cases that indicate the extent of parental autonomy when they consent or otherwise to medical treatment for their children. As in other jurisdictions, the courts have a parens patriae obligation that will be exercised in the best interests of the child. The interpretation of best interests lies finally with the courts, but the law allows, as it should, broad leeway for parents to raise children as they think fit, provided it does not threaten the health and safety of those children. The law also imposes a duty of care on physicians but recognizes that there are circumstances where physicians are not obliged to treat where they believe there would be no overall benefit. In the Case of Child and Family Services of Central Manitoba v. RL ,(363) a young infant suffered severe nonaccidental brain injury that eventually led to a diagnosis of a permanent vegetative state. The question before the court was whether the infant's physician could issue a “do not attempt resuscitation” order without the consent of the parents, who objected to the order. In ruling against the parents, Twaddle J A stated that:
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.474 | 0.113 |
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".