Jewish law, Jewish ethics and Quebec's culture: potential influences on the experience of infertility for Hasidic women in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to examine reproductive technologies and infertility from the perspective of Orthodox Jewish ethics, law and culture.Treating infertility is a complex process; individuals vary in their course of treatment, taking into account their medical situation, religious beliefs, prevailing cultural norms, reproductive policy in their jurisdiction, financial constraints, and their community context.For Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jews, this context includes a religious and cultural imperative to procreate, as well as religious law and social preference dictating the most preferred types of family.Judaism is a particularly pronatalist religion, and has a large body of halakhic text on reproductive technologies.Jewish people living in North America may also be influenced in their infertility experience by the policies and cultural norms of the society in which they live.This thesis examines the aspects of halakha (Jewish law), Quebec policy, Orthodox Jewish ethics, and ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic Jewish culture that are likely to influence the experience of infertility for Hasidic Jewish women in Quebec.Orthodox Judaism has a strong legacy of opinion defining the nature of family and the importance of genetics.This paper examines the aspects of Judaism and Hasidic culture that might strongly influence this experience, and also examines aspects of Quebec's history and current policy that may also influence this experience, albeit from a different angle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".