A Place Called Home? "Aging out" of Care in the Housing Crisis in Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the midst of the worst housing crisis that our nation has ever experienced, the moratorium on ‘aging out’ of care of the state in Ontario, Canada ended on April 1, 2023. Stemming from the Youth in Care Hearings, the provincial government has instituted the Ready, Set, Go Program. It is designed to provide youth in care with a phased plan for ‘aging out’ of the system and access to much needed services. While we acknowledge the benefits of this program, we believe that it does not go far enough to alleviate the prevalence of mental health challenges experienced by youth ‘aging out’ of care. In an effort to disrupt the settler-colonial neoliberal policies and ideology that fosters the production and reproduction of the oppression of one of the most vulnerable groups in society, that of children in care of the state, this commentary contests the very notion of ‘aging out’ of care. Through a social justice and health equity lens, we examine the concept and argue that the Eurocentric neoliberal notion of ‘aging out’ of the system is an inappropriate measure for determining when a youth is ready to leave care. We argue further that the concept of ‘aging out’ in general, and within the context of the current housing crisis in Toronto, Ontario in particular, will cause significant harm to the mental health and well-being of youth leaving care. Rather, we advocate for a more nuanced approach that centres on a series of indicators that assess individual readiness and mechanisms that can take exogenous factors, such as the housing crisis, into consideration. Keywords: ‘Aging out’ of care, child welfare, Eurocentric, housing crisis, neoliberalism, settler-colonialism.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".