Bound by Blame: Sentencing, Colonialism, and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gladue and Ipeelee send important messages to judges, but messages that have tensions within them that reflect the broader tensions of using the criminal law system to acknowledge ongoing state involvement in discrimination against Indigenous Peoples. The heart of the tension is that the criminal law system is built around assigning individual blame. I look closely at examples of judges struggling with inadequate tools to follow the Supreme Court of Canada’s guidelines to acknowledge and redress the harmful impacts of colonialism within the constraints of their job of assigning individual blame. The result, unfortunately, is a consistent failure to recognize the Canadian state’s ongoing role in colonial oppression. This article explores these tensions in the context of a particular manifestation: the judicial practice of blaming Indigenous mothers for the fetal alcohol spectrum disorder affecting their accused sons. The analysis illuminates the depth of the tensions of a common law criminal justice system in a colonial state: in the process of sentencing Indigenous offenders living with FASD, judges both strongly contest, and subtly rely upon, harmful colonial logics. I propose that a standing to blame analysis could assist judges in identifying, and responding to, the state’s own role in causing, or being complicit in, an Indigenous individual’s experiences of injustice. When the state has played such a role, the state is not justified in blaming the individual through the criminal law. The benefit of this kind of approach is that it would highlight the inappropriateness of the state’s use of individual blame to respond to harms arising in the context of colonialism and inequality.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".