"Always There": How Young Mothers Make Meaning of the Concept of Support Within the Context of Service Provision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through this study, I aim to increase understanding of how young moms experience, perceive, make meaning, and conceptualize positive support within the context of service provision (education, residential services, legal services, healthcare etc.). More broadly, I aim to illuminate ways that societal notions of vulnerability and autonomy may be shifted to offer improved quality of support to young mothers and other marginalized communities. Such a shift would counter paternalistic attitudes that have historically influenced how “support” has been imposed on young mothers. Although a full transformation would take time, we may begin to undertake the necessary work of reimagining support, gradually shifting towards the goal of building capabilities toward relational autonomy. 25 moms from diverse socio-economic backgrounds in Ontario, Canada, between the ages of 16-25 years, participated in creating visual art images and/or verbally sharing what support meant to them. I engaged in a relational approach to interaction and dialogue, centering a praxis of reflexivity and ethical treatment of everyone involved in the interview process. Guided by a critical feminist framework that included intersectionality, maternal theory, and vulnerability theory, I engaged in a feminist phenomenological approach to the analysis of transcripts and co-constructed visual analysis of imagery with the moms. Study findings reveal how service provision contexts are shaped by traditional ways of understanding vulnerability and autonomy as a binary and in opposition to one another, with an overvaluation of invulnerability. Yet young moms describe that they understand positive support as a combination of both responses to the effects of exposure to sources of vulnerability and as efforts to build autonomy in relationships with service providers, infrastructure, and broader communities of care. In addition, young moms describe positive qualities of service design and delivery, such as being non-judgemental, reliable, and sensitive, with attuned and caring interactions. The combination of these qualities can facilitate a process of internalization of positive attitudes, culminating in the development of an identity as a confident caregiver.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".