“Short-Term Band-Aid Solutions”: A Feminist Analysis of Family Caregiving and Caregiver Immigration Policies in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout Canada, the need for care provision services is on the rise. The number of people willing and able to provide these care services is insufficient to address the growing need for care. Care work is provided by a mix of paid workers and unpaid family members. The majority of both these groups of care workers are women. Care work has long been undervalued as feminized labour, resulting in insufficient government support for family caregivers, and persistent labour issues within paid care sectors. In this thesis, I explore two distinct sets of Canadian federal policies related to care provision – Employment Insurance (EI) benefits for unpaid family caregivers, and the Home Child Care Provider and Home Support Worker Pilot Programs, which facilitate the immigration of private in-home caregivers to Canada – in order to discover whether they are underpinned by a shared set of similar assumptions about the nature of care work, who is best suited to perform it, and how it should be provided. In examining the assumptions about care that underpin and shape these policies related to care provision in Canada, I identify a number of consistent gendered themes about care and care providers and analyze their impact on policy outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.047 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".