MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7139683410

Systemic Neglect in the Ontario Child Welfare System: An Analysis of Youth Testimonies from the 2012 Youth Leaving Care Hearings in Ontario

2025· dissertation· W7139683410 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabra Desai

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNarrative inquiryNeglectYouth studiesWelfareMental healthEconomic JusticeHealth careFoster careCriminal justice
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines and incorporates the themes from youth narratives in My Real-Life Book: Report from the Youth Leaving Care Hearings in Ontario (2012). Employing and engaging with the voices of those directly impacted by the child welfare system (CWS), namely youth in care (YICs), former youth in care (FYICs), and adoptees, this research offers an important alternate narrative to dominant public discourses that problematize children and youth in care. Using a social justice education lens that engages with an integrated scaffolded framework applying critical race theory (CRT), anti-racist feminist theory, and the concepts of Foucault and Bourdieu, this dissertation examines YIC/FYIC/Adoptees’ narratives to expose how systemic power imbalances impact youth through institutional neglect. The analysis of the youths’ narratives along with the researcher’s themes from the literature review, reveals the impacts of institutional practices devoid of meaningful, purposeful youth participation in decision-making, the lack of stability, and the life-long impacts of mandated care purported to protect children and youth. Critical discourse analysis is applied to analyze youth narratives to expose implicit and explicit realities contextualized within broader historical and socio-political frameworks that shape the experiences of YICs. This research also includes current public perspectives offered by key stakeholders, such as child advocates, social workers, health and mental health advocates, educators, criminal justice researchers and housing advocates. Thus, the study provides an important perspective on and understanding of how interconnected institutions maintain structural disparities in access to opportunities. The findings and analysis accentuate the potential for youth voices to transform the CWS by challenging dominant structural hierarchies and existing practices that are no longer helpful to youth in care. This work advocates for and contributes to the current research, highlighting the critical need for meaningfully collaborative policies and practices toward institutional reform with input from youth who are directly impacted by interconnected systems. Finally, this research aims to intensify the plea for a genuine, empathetic, equitable, and humane CWS that fosters youth agency, autonomy, and dignity. Keywords: Youth in care; child welfare system; critical race theory; systemic power imbalances; critical discourse analysis; Bourdieu; Foucault.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0210.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207