MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391152796 · doi:10.46692/9781447365648.010

Ideal, good enough and failed motherhood: how disabled Canadian mothers manage in hostile circumstances

2023· other· en· W4391152796 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claudia Malacrida

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeal (ethics)PsychologyGender studiesDevelopmental psychologySociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This chapter draws on narrative interviews with 44 disabled women from the province of Alberta in Canada regarding their experiences as disabled mothers. The interview approach is firmly situated in narrative studies and feminist standpoint theory, inviting women to tell their stories in loosely structured ways, based on the understanding that women are best situated to speak to the workings of power in their own lives (Toole, 2021). Although these stories come from one province, they reflect broader experiences of disabled women in Canada, as research nationally indicates that the issues disabled mothers face are depressingly similar across provincial boundaries (Track, 2014; Burlock, 2017). The stories presented here were selected to illustrate commonalities and key differences among the original research participants; a brief biography for each of the seven women whose stories are presented is provided at the end of this chapter. Ideal motherhood and disability Feminists have exposed the purportedly private and natural experience of motherhood as a political and social institution. Starting with women themselves, feminists have built a strong body of research that characterises ‘ideal motherhood’ as a socially constructed set of normative expectations that place mothers under increasing demands to be knowledgeable experts on childrearing, limitlessly focused upon and available to their children, and fully responsible for any ills or imperfections that may befall them (Hays, 1996; Malacrida, 2009; Lankes, 2022). Thus, on the one hand, ideal motherhood is characterised as next to sacred, with the future of nations and generations resting in the hands of an omniscient, endlessly nurturant and selfless woman. On the other, ‘bad’ mothers are often characterised as the architects of social, economic, psychological and moral problems, not only for their children but for the nation state, when their mothering fails to live up to those heroic expectations (Ladd-Taylor and Umansky, 1998; Ramsay, 2016). These expectations and anxieties privatise and individualise the work of childbearing and rearing to individual women, while simultaneously providing minimal collective or public support to women in accomplishing that work. The expectations of ideal motherhood are such that any woman will struggle to satisfy them. However, for disabled mothers, living up to these normative demands is particularly fraught, not because disabled women cannot mother superlatively, but because the barriers to parenthood begin for women long before conception, and are challenged thereafter in multiple and systemic ways (Malacrida, 2007).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0390.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207