says Jay BELSKY:

NY Times Nov. 2014 (paywall):
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/opinion/sunday/the-downside-of-resilience.html

Belsky's "orchid vs. dandelion" educational genetics  Differential Susceptibility Hypothesis and his eventual policy recommendation:

Flip those little epigenetic switches by granting your child a caring, loving, yet costly upbringing and environment - but only if the child features the adequate "susceptibility" allel?

"The Downside of Resilience", as BELSKY put it in his article, is the lack of "Dandelion" children of susceptibility to positive enviroment stimuli: A dandelion will do well anyway and anywhere. A fragile, susceptible "Orchid" child, on the other hand, will wither if lacking care and love, and it will blossom in an outstanding way if granted an outstandig, yet costly upbringing. A "Dandelion" child, according to BELSKY, won't return that much on your investment, will just consume your costly care and love.

Is BELSKY's epigenetics narrative based on Negative Utilitarianism, to minimize the suffering of otherwise marginalized persons, or on Human Resources Industry profitability models, or just on his need to underpin his personal philosophy of child raising?