Civil Investigation and Abuse of Vulnerable Adults in Calgary: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2004, Calgary’s Action Group on Elder Abuse (AGEA), an initiative of the Alliance to End Violence, has engaged community stakeholders in identifying gaps and building community capacity in addressing the issue of abuse of older adults. In 2007, AGEA initiated the development of a coordinated community response model for older adult victims of abuse and neglect in Calgary. As part of this process, three “Pulling Back the Curtain” working sessions were held in 2008, where community stakeholders were engaged in discussions regarding what Calgary’s community response model requires in order to be effective. As a result of these working sessions, a response model was drafted and presented to the community in October 2008. The consultations on the response model led to discussions regarding a civil investigation procedure for responding to situations where abuse or the risk of abuse of an older adult is alleged in the community, as it was recognized that a gap in protection exists in Alberta for this population. This is especially true of cases where there is no discernable criminal element. AGEA recognized the importance of determining whether a non-criminal investigation procedure would be appropriate, feasible, and desired in Calgary. AGEA approached the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF) in 2009 with the idea of conducting a small feasibility study. Ultimately, AGEA would use the results of the study to increase Calgary stakeholders’ understanding of civil investigation, and consult with the community on whether it should be a part of Calgary’s community response model to address the abuse of older adults. With funding from the Alberta Law Foundation, and in partnership with AGEA, CRILF and legal consultant Sheryl Pearson began work on the feasibility study in March 2010. The purpose of this report is to determine the feasibility of a non-criminal investigation procedure in Calgary for cases where abuse of older adults is suspected, including the resources and legal mechanisms required as well as potential issues that may exist. The objectives of the report are as follows: (1) To increase understanding of the legal mechanisms available in Alberta provincial adult protection legislation; (2) To increase understanding of non-criminal investigation models in Canada and internationally for cases of older adult abuse, and the legal and social mechanisms required for their operation; (3) To determine whether non-criminal investigation would be appropriate and supported in Calgary’s community response model; and (4) To determine the feasibility of adopting a non-criminal investigation procedure in Alberta as a possible tool to better protect older adults in the community.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".