Are parenting leaves available for LGBTQ parents? Examining policies in Canada, Croatia, France, Iceland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter examines LGBTQ parents' access to parenting options and the availability of parenting leave for LGBTQ parents in Canada, Croatia, France, Iceland, the Netherlands, and the UK. The first part of the chapter provides a brief overview of the recognition and access to parenting rights of coupled LGBTQ parents in relation to same-sex marriage, adoption, assisted reproductive technology, and surrogacy. The second part of the chapter focuses on leave eligibility, (in)equality of female and male same-sex parents in access to leave, and recognition of transgender and non-binary parents as well as multi-parent families. While there have been efforts to make policies more inclusive of LGBTQ families, our case studies show that it is not only restrictions in parenting leave policies that limit leave access for LGBTQ parents but rather restrictions in policies based on gender (mothers get more leave than fathers), paths to parenthood (birth parents get more leave than adoptive parents), and views of family (multi-parent families are not recognized).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".