MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380569737 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.210

Abortion Legalization and Child in The Womb Right to Life: A Study from Indonesia

2022· article· en· W4380569737 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fifik Wiryani, Widjanarko Andang, Muhammad Nasser

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegalizationAbortionHarmReproductive rightsLawStatutory lawUnsafe abortionAbortion lawReproductive healthNormativeIndonesianMedicineTabooPolitical sciencePregnancyFamily planningPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the Indonesian legal system, women's reproductive and unborn child's rights to life are equally important. A woman has the right to determine her pregnancy period or even reject her unwanted pregnancy. On one side, legal abortion is part of women's reproductive rights. On the other side, the unborn child's life in the womb is also protected by law. Any attempt to harm the fetus' well-being or deliberately dispose of its life is illegal. Generally, Indonesian are against abortion. However, in specific cases, abortion legalization occurs when the pregnancy becomes harmful and endangering the mother's life. In fact, in certain labor cases, the doctor must do an abortion to save the mother's life. Through Health Act No. 36 of 2009 Article 75, abortion is permitted with emergencies on mothers and rape victims. This paper aims to analyze whether two indications of abortion legalization written on the Health Act are still acceptable from the standpoint of unborn child rights. As normative research, this paper uses both statutory and medical approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicMarriage and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207