MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413185879 · doi:10.32920/29896847

Tracing the Grounds for Divorce: A Feminist Critique of Canadian Family Law

2025· preprint· en· W4413185879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deanne Sowter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily lawTracingLawPolitical scienceSociologyCriminologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper traces the law governing the grounds for divorce in Canada. Beginning with early colonial divorce law, through the introduction of the federal Divorce Act in 1968, to the current legislation and 2021 amendments, I trace the evolution through a feminist legal theory lens. In doing so, I consider the implications of removing the fault paradigm without replacing it with legislative responses to gender-based concerns, specifically the feminisation of poverty and intimate partner violence. I suggest that the remnants of the matrimonial offences theory need to be removed from the 1985 Divorce Act in order to move towards a family law regime capable of accounting for the feminisation of disadvantage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0380.045
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207