The Survival of Abortion Access in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The topic of abortion is fraught with intense debate across all people, especially in North America. With the recent Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, abortion access is under renewed attack in the United States. Canada has made an identity for itself in its persistent defense of the right to terminate a pregnancy, one of the stronger stances against its historically overbearing neighbor. The R. v. Morgentaler ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1988 decriminalized abortion and established a standard for the defense of reproductive rights. Later legal disputes and judgments have strengthened Canada's pro-choice position. However, there is a more malicious and complex history in both countries on this issue, and the future is beginning to look just as unstable. This paper aims to highlight the evolving attitudes and ominous impact of the changes in the United States for Canadian women in regards to their reproductive rights. Through a thorough comparison of the historic, political, and cultural ideas of both countries, I will present how the right to an abortion in Canada is being undermined and threatened by continued influence of the US.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".