MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161774951 · doi:10.82308/14126

Reflection on the legal status on sterilization in contemporary Canada

2002· dissertation· en· W7161774951 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clémentine Sallée

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSterilization (economics)Principle of legalityEugenicsLegislatureLegislationLegal status

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In light of its past eugenic use, and its often irreversible nature, non-therapeutic sterilization, the result of which is to deprive an individual of his/her capacity to procreate, has always enjoyed a particular status and its use and legal status engendered debate, discussion and controversy. The purpose of this dissertation is to determine under which conditions non-therapeutic sterilization can lawfully be performed under Canadian law. Whereas the legality of non-therapeutic sterilization when voluntarily consented to by a competent individual is today established in all Canadian provinces, it appears that Quebec is the only province to allow non-therapeutic sterilization to be performed on an individual lacking through age and/or disability the necessary capacity to consent, common law provinces denying any beneficial aspects to the procedure. The law on involuntary non-therapeutic sterilization however lacks clarity, certainty and consistency, a legislative reform is therefore advocated.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0320.024
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207