Parentesco, resistência e os futuros que construímos: uma conversa com Pamela Block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This conversation brings together critical reflections on disability, care, kinship, and intersectionality through a transnational lens, featuring Pamela Block and interlocutors Lilian Magalhães and Sandra Galheigo. Drawing from both personal and academic experiences, Pamela Block discusses how family structures, institutional expectations, and systemic inequities shape the lives of disabled individuals and their siblings and explores how they co-create futures in contexts often marked by exclusion. The dialogue also addresses the uneven distribution of care responsibilities, particularly in Canada and Brazil, highlighting the ways in which race, class, gender, and immigration status intersect with disability. Attention is given to the social construction of "non-disabled" siblings as default caregivers and the emotional and structural consequences this carries. As Lilian and Sandra draw parallels with Brazilian realities, the conversation underscores the global relevance of these issues while emphasizing the need to resist reductive approaches—whether based solely on class or medical categories. This exchange invites readers to think critically about care, agency, and justice in everyday life, and contributes meaningfully to the broader project of decolonizing disability studies and occupational therapy.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".