MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416746369 · doi:10.3138/ijfab-2025-0005

Involuntary Treatment Legislation in Canada: Implications for Pregnant People and Parents

2025· article· en· W4416746369 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alana Cattapan, Holly A. McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationApprehensionInvoluntary treatmentCivil rightsPunishment (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2023, three Canadian provincial governments have announced plans to establish involuntary treatment laws that would apply to people who use criminalized substances, with one province passing such legislation in 2025. In this commentary, the authors attend to the implications of this approach for pregnant people and parents and identify two key concerns. First, involuntary treatment punishes parents, likely contributing to the apprehension of their children—present and future—and undermining their access to health services. Second, involuntary treatment legislation will likely be applied in ways that bolster fetal rights and fetal protection discourse, enabling the confinement of pregnant people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueInternational Journal of Feminist Approaches to BioethicsSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207