From a Criminal to a Human-Rights Issue: Re-Imagining Policy Solutions to Homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Criminalizing homelessness is ineffective, costly, and immoral; yet it remains a dominant feature in the management of this global social issue. There has been little analysis investigating why punitive homeless policies have remained popular despite their ineffectiveness. In applying Bacchi's What's the Problem Represented to Be (WPR) framework to a Canadian encampment bylaw, our analysis demonstrated that public policies criminalizing homelessness continue to prevail because homelessness is fundamentally understood as a problem of deviant, criminal individual behavior. We argue that reframing understandings of homelessness from one of criminality to a human rights issue gives way to more dignified, just, and effective solutions, such as the Housing First Model. We suggest that community health nurses can serve a key role in disrupting these criminalizing discourses across domains of policy, research, and practice by advocating for holistic, rights-based, and equity-oriented policy solutions related to homelessness.
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 | 0.027 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.102 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".