Access to early childhood services by precarious status families: Negotiating multiple borders in a sanctuary city, Toronto Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Precarious status families include at least one member, parent or child, without authorized sociolegal status. U.S. based research analyzes the spill-over effect of a parental undocumented status on citizen children among mixed-status families. We consider whether such a process plays out in Canada as well by reviewing Sanctuary City policies meant to mitigate status-based exclusions by promoting access without fear. We examine policies and practices in Toronto related to services that families with young children require, focusing on what is specified in policies as well as discrepancies in how policies are applied and experiences of access in the areas of childbirth, childcare, parenting programs, and schooling. The paper is based on a review of literature and government documents, and information from key informants. Consistent with others, our analysis shows that the City’s access agenda is entangled with policies from other levels of government or institutions that do not follow this agenda (e.g., police and border services). Combined with inadequate information and discretionary and uneven implementation, families experience a patchwork of access in practice across the four service areas. We conclude that despite the access agenda, spill-over is structured into the Sanctuary City, although it plays out unevenly thanks to points of access. This generates the conditions for multigenerational punishment for children and parents in precarious status families, regardless of place of birth or sociolegal status. Further research can address these dynamics in other contexts. Policy recommendations include municipal advocacy for status for all, and clear and consistent messaging across institutions and levels of government. </p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".