Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last few decades have seen unprecedented legal changes in support of lesbian and gay equality in many Western nations across the world, including the United Kingdom, many countries in Europe, New Zealand, Australia, USA and Canada.The chapter provides an overview of the ways in which lesbians, gay men, trans and non-binary people are having children and creating families. The first part of the chapter will discuss LGBT+ family forming/creation that has occurred largely outside of the influence of the state. The second part of the chapter will look more closely at LGBT+ fostering and adoption practices – this is a route to parenthood that involves the state entering the homes and lives of those LGBT+ citizens who put themselves forward for assessment. These will almost always be undertaken by a social worker. As well as presenting data about various studies that have evaluated the outcomes for children, fostered and adopted by lesbians and gay men, the chapter will also critically examine the way in which social workers are consciously/unconsciously influenced by heteronormative expectations of what it means to be a family when assessing LGBT+ people as adopters and foster carers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.104 | 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".