MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996335194

Sea of Destruction: Legal and Social Forces Enabling Sexual Abuse of Children

2022· article· en· W6996335194 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationSexual misconductChild sexual abuseGovernment (linguistics)Sexual abuseState (computer science)Work (physics)Sexual assaultChild protectionMisconduct
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Article seeks to expose the truth of how our schools, laws, and powerful groups in our society actively work to aid mobile molesters in schools—mobile because they move from child to child and school to school, all with the blessing of adult enablers who are charged to protect children. According to news reports, in 2015, at least 498 teachers and other school workers were arrested for sexual misconduct with children. That is almost three per school day. Even worse, in addition to the initial attack by the molester, the child is subsequently revictimized by others who aim attempt to protect the perpetrator and institution: bystanders, teachers, principals, special interest groups, government bureaucrats and politicians.\nThere are a body of laws and social forces that work to re-brutalize a survivor of child sexual assault. The decision to fail the vulnerable cannot be excused, must not be tolerated. That decision—perhaps decisions is a more accurate reflection—will be our primary focus. We do so to propose measures with one primary goal: to untangle the web of molesters-institutions-enabling that ensnares the vulnerable in a vice-like grip, with nowhere to run or hide.\nThis Article is comprised of three distinct, yet merged, voices: survivors from the US and Canada; data demonstrating the degree to which the mobility of molesters is institutionalized and enabled; recommendations for legislation focused on criminalizing the enabler. Our emphasis in this Article is specific: enablers protect teachers, coaches, and administrators who assault vulnerable school children mandated by state law to attend school. Focusing on the enablers holds them accountable for their actions and significantly curtails the ability of molesters to harm children. To protect these children, we propose creating mechanisms to criminalize enabling behavior. In that vein, our attention in this Article is not the molesters and their crimes but rather on those who created the infrastructure enabling the perpetrators. That does not minimize the actions of the molester but rather expands the focus to an additional, key actor in the crime.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207