Parental Perspectives on Upholding Children’s Rights in the Context of Aggression toward Family/Caregivers in Childhood & Adolescence (AFCCA) in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aggression toward family/caregivers in childhood and adolescence (AFCCA) is a serious societal concern, yet it remains an under-researched area in Canada. Since existing studies elsewhere have focused primarily on its prevalence, risk factors and impacts, the child rights and family systems implications are less understood. This qualitative pilot study explored Canadian adoptive, kinship and customary caregivers’ considerations of their child’s rights to support and to be heard as they navigated the challenging context of their child’s aggressive behaviour towards them and other family members. The findings from interviews with 18 caregivers indicate that parental approaches were child-centred and trauma-informed as they sought to attend to the best interests of all children affected by AFCCA in their home. The results demonstrate the need for greater acknowledgment of AFCCA from a child rights perspective, and for comprehensive and non-biased family support services in order to fully meet the needs of all AFCCA-affected children and youth.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it