Basically, those gene combos that lead to problems (depression, ADHD, blah, blah, bleeping, blah) in kids and adults are _really_ modulated by raising.
It's an interesting article, and I would urge anyone reading it to _finish_ it, particularly the stuff at the end about Dunbar number, because it is at that point that they quit being so focused on the mum-kid dyad, and start looking at how that relationship is modulated by the larger group, that larger group's ranking within the whole society, and the size of those groups. There's a weird argument for suburbia buried somewhere in there, but why get into it. I mean, really.
In any event, I, personally am utterly riveted because I think this is the moment where Belsky's revived career is about to jump something-or-other again. Previously, Belsky shot himself in the foot by switching from a pro-care-by-others message to an anti-care-by-not-the-mother message. That is, he went from telling everyone it was okay to put the babies in group care from birth to saying things like, more than 20 hours a week with anyone other than the mother (including fathers, grandma, etc.) for the first year of life was trouble, and group care was awful. (These are oversimplifications. But not by a lot.)
It looks like this time, he's going to take the guilt-release-valve of bad-genes, and turn it instead into something like this: you had a kid who could have been a superstar, but because you are a crap parent, your kid will be in and out of very bad places, instead. (Never mind that the parents had the same set of genes, odds on, and parenting advice when they were kids was really creepy in the US.) This should do wonders for his career.