Intragenerational Support for Gender‐Questioning and Trans Youth: Centering the Sibling Subsystem in Affirmative Systemic Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Affirmative systemic therapy (AST) is an emerging trend in family therapy for accompanying families with a gender questioning, nonbinary, or trans child. Simultaneously, research from across the globe reports that the inclusion of siblings and the focus on the sibling subsystem are often lacking in systemic work. The authors write from a shared Canadian perspective toward expanding the inclusion of siblings of gender diverse young people in therapy. Siblings may serve as early sources of self-disclosure and exploration surrounding gender identity for young gender questioning and trans individuals. Siblings may also play important roles as mediators, educators, and advocates among peers and family, given their shared generational zeitgeist. Through a case study, we exemplify the importance of involving the sibling subsystem while working with gender diverse families. More specifically, we begin by focusing on obstacles to the inclusion of siblings in affirmative systemic therapy. Then, we discuss strategies toward better inclusion and integration, namely, systemic approaches and techniques for working with the sibling subsystem with a focus on the theme of gender creativity, transition, or questioning. In this article, we advocate for the greater inclusion of siblings in family therapy generally, and hope to contribute to an ongoing conversation by illustrating some techniques for working with the sibling subsystem, in AST more specifically.
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 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".