First Nations child welfare in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal, and in particular First Nations children, are overrepresented in the child welfare system across Canada. While information about child welfare services provided to First Nations children and families in Québec is sparse, the evidence that does exist supports the national trends of overrepresentation. Understanding how child welfare services are delivered in Québec is essential in comprehending how First Nations peoples receive, and are impacted by, the various methods of child welfare delivery in this province. The first section of this paper presents an overview of First Nations child welfare history, describing colonial and child welfare policies responsible for the removal of tens of thousands of First Nations children from their homes and communities. The next section outlines current socioeconomic, legislative, jurisdictional and funding challenges in the delivery of First Nations child welfare, linking them to the historical development described in the first section. It also presents an overview of the current structure of the First Nations child welfare system in Canada and Québec, examining some of the research regarding the response of Québec's child welfare system to the complex needs of First Nations children and families. Finally, the paper concludes with a discussion of the factors contributing to the overrepresentation of First Nations children in the child welfare system including the impact of historical assimilationist policies, the socioeconomic status of First Nations peoples in Canada and the development of First Nations child welfare services. Implications for practice, policy and future research are also discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".