Infant rates of child protective services contact and termination of parental rights by First Nations status from 1998 to 2019: An example of intergenerational transmission of colonial harm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rates of child removal by child protective services (CPS) in Manitoba are the highest in Canada with a profoundly disproportionate impact on First Nations families. Despite infants constituting the highest proportion of children affected, no research has examined population-level rates of infant contact with CPS. OBJECTIVE: We examined the incidence of infant contact with different levels of CPS, including termination of parental rights (TPR), according to First Nations status. PARTICIPANTS: We identified 217,261 infants (47,416 First Nations; 169,845 non-First Nations) born between 1998 and 2014 in Manitoba, Canada and residing in the province until at least age 5. METHODS: We used linked administrative data to calculate population-level rates of contact with different levels of CPS by First Nations status, including an open file before age 1, out-of-home placement before age 1, and TPR before age 5. RESULTS: Overall 35.8 % of First Nations infants had an open file, 8.5 % experienced out-of-home placement, and 5.4 % experienced TPR. Among other infants, 8.5 % had an open file, 1.3 % experienced out-of-home placement and 0.7 % experienced TPR. The rate of early-stage contact increased the fastest among First Nations infants, with a rise of 22.4 % in our study period, compared to a rise of 1.7 % among all other infants. CONCLUSIONS: CPS contact was exceptionally high among First Nations infants compared to other infants, with early-stage contact accelerating most dramatically over time. Findings support calls to greatly reduce the disruption of system contact in the lives of First Nations families.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".