Bibliographic record
Abstract
DOHaD research on preconception, prenatal, and early-life periods of human development can provide a critical resource for legal thinkers interrogating the lines of responsibility for environmental harms (both physical and psychosocial) that affect a child’s growth and development. DOHaD scholars who engage with epigenetic research offer an evidentiary narrative that traces the causal origin of early-life health harms to events that have occurred during pregnancy and prior to conception. Scientific research is increasingly providing evidence that those who suffer disadvantage throughout their lifecourse (in conditions of systemic oppression such as from racism, sexism, or poverty) may be disproportionately subject to molecular changes, creating harmed subgroups that are then intergenerationally reproduced as socially disadvantaged communities. Drawing examples from Australia, the United States, and Canada, this chapter asks what legal obligations, if any, should or can be imposed on contemporary society to ensure not just the future ’health’ of existing children (as they grow into adults) but also the generations of people yet to be born. It is argued that traditional common law legal responses that place responsibility on the individual rather than the community do not ensure intergenerational justice.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".