“Doing family” from the standpoint of single Filipina migrant mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I aim to center the standpoint of single Filipina mothers engaged in migrant domestic work, a demographic largely decentered in the literature on family and migration. Specifically, I examine how they “do family” from a distance using feminist standpoint theory and culturally sensitive Filipino indigenous methodologies: pakikilahok (close participation) and pakikipagkwentuhan (exchange of stories). My findings reveal that while the experiences of my interlocutors echo general themes in transnational motherhood, they also face unique challenges: juggling the dual roles of financial and care provider, a heightened imperative to work overseas coupled with the pressure of sole responsibility for their children, additional logistical hurdles in coordinating care overseas through female relatives, and navigating their employment context without the emotional and financial support of a partner. I also find that engaging in paid care work in Singapore and performing mediated and unpaid care work in the Philippines do not necessarily operate under a zero-sum dynamic, as these roles are interconnected and can coexist. Finally, in this study, I do not only document single Filipina migrant mothers’ struggles and strategies in “doing family”; I also attempt to contribute to highlighting their voices and aiding in the pursuit of epistemic 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".