Living in the In-between: Implications of Counter Narratives of Immigrant Youth with Disabilities in the Canadian Nation State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2016, the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth published a longitudinal study sharing the stories of children and youth with disabilities across Ontario, Canada. Largely missing were the stories of LGBT+, Indigenous, newcomer and/or racialized youth with disabilities. This is a common practice, which continues to erase those who experience a confluence of systemic barriers. When disabled youth are written about it is usually from a service user perspective, especially regarding mental health (see Beiser et al., 2011; Shakya, Khanlou, Gonsalves, 2010; Simich, Beiser, Stewart, Mwakarimba, 2005) through a biomedical lens. Moreover, there is a dominant practice to write about disability as a single identity that defines the experiences of the individual. This leaves out attention to the migration experiences of racialized immigrant youth with disabilities. The study used open-ended semi-structured interviews with 10 (5 males and 5 females) racialized immigrant youth (ages 16-24) with disabilities living in the Greater Toronto Area in Ontario, Canada. Participants illustrate how dominant discourses of disability as a deficit, burden, and undesirable impacts their sense of self-worth, which is intrinsically tied to their employment, their educational journey and how they do/not access navigate health and social services. Their stories also bring to the forefront the complexity of migration pathways and signals the need to rethink migration as occurring on multiple planes leading many to occupy an in-between space. This study contributes to our understandings of disability as they are shaped by changes in Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that continues to define and classify disabled people and the lack of critical scholarly research in the critical disability studies and immigrant youth literature in Canada. Through first-person storytelling, this study challenges racism and ableism.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".