Abortion rights revision: <i>Dobbs</i> , COVID-19, and policy complexity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of transformations in abortion politics in countries like Mexico, where constitutional protections were recently extended, and in the United States, where they were eliminated, it is important to consider the processes through which abortion rights undergo significant change in what appear to be more stable policy landscapes. In this article, I examine the changing meaning and content of the right to abortion in Canada in the context of increased policy complexity generated by two major, recent, transnational events: the US Dobbs decision and the COVID-19 pandemic. This single case study with critical insights provided by activists demonstrates the ways in which complexity generates disruptive, unintended political and policy consequences in a ‘boundary spanning’ policy regime. Through interpretive analysis of interviews and grounded normative theory, I argue that the right to abortion in Canada has been revised to move beyond its foundational commitments to health care and autonomy and become more attentive to a broader range of reproductive injustices that combine to limit access to abortion and proscribe reproductive freedom.
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 | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.082 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| 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".