Red Girls’ Love, Power, and Resistance: Conversations on Care with Indigenous Girls, Queer, Trans, and Two Spirit Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current literature on how Indigenous girls experience mental health interventions and services in Canada is limited. Indigenous girls face disproportionately high rates of physical and sexual victimization, which emphasizes the need for preventative and intervention services to promote their wellbeing. As future Indigenous women, Indigenous girls hold special significance to community and family life with respect to their roles as children and future teachers, healers, and leaders. The current study asked how Indigenous girls experience and described their experiences of care. Utilizing a qualitative Indigenous feminist storytelling approach, this study interviewed nine Indigenous girls (including queer, trans, and Two Spirit youth) regarding their life stories, experiences accessing traditional, community, and westernized mental health supports to obtain insights on their perspectives of strengths and barriers of care. Results included identification of six themes: Re-Storying Challenging Childhood Experiences, Care that is Uncaring, Collective and Reciprocal Healing, Small, Everyday Acts, Barriers to Health and Wellbeing, and Decolonizing Care Practices. Limitations, conclusions, and implications for mental health practice engaging with Indigenous girls and communities 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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".