MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400580383 · doi:10.1080/27706869.2024.2375115

The plurality of norms that factor into Canadians’ decisions to engage in transnational egg transactions

2024· article· en· W4400580383 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathleen Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueLegal Pluralism and Critical Social Analysis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFactor (programming language)BusinessPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Egg donation is regulated differently in countries around the world. In Canada, federal law – the Assisted Human Reproduction Act – prohibits paying egg providers. As a result, many Canadians are engaging in a grey market for eggs or are pursuing transnational egg transactions by traveling to countries with more permissive laws, or having eggs shipped to Canada. In this paper I rely on interview data with 18 Canadian intended parents and 16 Canadian egg providers – many of whom had traveled abroad for egg transactions – to understand how intended parents and egg providers decide how they will pursue egg transactions; specifically, why so many Canadians choose to engage in transnational egg transactions. I use Brian Z. Tamanaha’s theory of systems of normative ordering, combined with Paul Schiff Berman’s cosmopolitan pluralism, as a framework to reveal the plurality of norms and other factors that weigh into this decision-making and that help reveal the answer to the “why.” Ultimately, I illustrate how intended parents and egg providers are impacted by sometimes clashing norms from official legal systems, economic/capitalist systems, and customary/cultural systems. These norms, along with moral and practical concerns, shape the decisions of intended parents and egg providers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLegal Pluralism and Critical Social AnalysisSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207