Characteristics of gender minority youth in Canada, 15–17 years of age, by gender identity disclosure patterns to parents and teachers: A descriptive study in response to anti-trans legislation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the course of 2021–2025, an increase in state-sponsored anti-transgender antagonism has been seen in the form of laws that restrict the rights of transgender and gender-expansive (TGE) people and, in particular, youth. For example, in October 2023, the Saskatchewan (SK) legislative assembly passed Bill 137, which requires parental consent before a student’s self-determined and gender-affirming name or identity can be used by teachers or school employees. These policies expose TGE youth to risks of familial rejection and preventable stress. The Understanding Affirming Communities, Relationships, and Networks survey (2022) sought to characterize Canadian TGE students aged 15–17 years, comparing those who disclosed their gender identity to teachers but not to parents/caregivers ( n = 241)—a group that likely reflects those most at risk of having their identities involuntarily disclosed to parents/caregivers through policy changes like those enacted in SK—and those who disclosed their gender identity to both teachers and parents/caregivers ( n = 728). Those who disclosed to teachers but not parents/caregivers included a greater proportion of youth who were assigned male at birth; identified as non-binary, genderfluid, or unsure about gender identity; culturally identified as African, Southeast Asian, or Middle Eastern; racially identified as Asian; or had at least one parent/guardian born outside of Canada. These findings underscore the crucial role of educational institutions as safe spaces for TGE youth, highlighting the potential risk created by policies that remove youth agency and force involuntary disclosure of TGE youth identities to potentially non-supportive parents/caregivers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".