The Minnesota research team assessed 540 non-adopted adolescents, 514 internationally-adopted adolescents and 178 domestically-adopted adolescents from the ages of 11 to 21, according to a press release. The study also interviewed adoptees directly, as opposed to relying on questionnaires filled out by parents, as prior studies had.

Keyes made sure to emphasize to Time that even though adoptees are more likely to have a rough time during adolescence, potential parents shouldn't be deterred. "Males are likelier to have behavior issues... But no one is overly concerned about having boys," Keyes said. She also added, "All adolescents struggle with finding their identity. It makes sense adopted children would struggle more than most."

Adoptees More Likely to be Troubled [Time]
US Teens Adopted As Infants Appear To Have Moderately Increased Odds Of Mental Health Problems [EurekAlert]

According to the Financial Times, there's a charity in the UK, Oxpip, devoted to helping parents in their relationship with their babies. Researchers believe that early relationships shape an infant's brain and nervous system; babies born to parents with attachment disorders often have emotional and mental health problems later in life. It's enough to make you wonder if you should just skip the mommy thing, especially if you're not naturally a "baby person."

I'm one of those people who doesn't just automatically like babies. I can recognize a cute baby when I see one (Zahara!), but I'm not "into" infants. (My sister, who is in veterinary school, is the same way, and has been known to declare: "I don't like baby humans.") I'm neither married nor at the point in my life where I'm seriously considering having kids, and the lukewarm (at best) feelings I have about babies make me wonder if I even want to have any. Ever. But saying so makes me feel vaguely guilty. Should a woman who is reluctant about motherhood have a baby anyway? And if you have a child and feel a sense of regret, are you a bad mother?

Women Who Aren't Cut Out For Motherhood [Times of London]
Welcome To The Nuthouse [Salon]
When The Magic Of Motherhood Is Missing [Financial Times]
Related: Oxford Parent Infant Project

A "lifestyle divide", in which women take on the burden of domestic duties, creates a vicious circle as they are then less able to work the long hours needed to win top jobs. They then earn less and are reinforced as responsible for household tasks, says the Europe-wide research.

Ms. Harris commented on an L.A. Times article ("Moms Over 40 A Risky Trend," by Mary Engel), writing: "This story (along with others like it) also misses a broader cultural point. 'Their 40s just seemed to sneak up on them,' Engel writes. Right. But doesn't that happen to lots of us these days — especially as our 20s have become the time to NOT settle down? Isn't everything happening later, including old age?... Every decade is 'the new' previous decade."

What are we supposed to do in a world where women can dream of "having it all" and instead find themselves doing it all?

Career Women Work Longer Hours Than Men [Telegraph]
Childcare Locks Women Into Lower-Paid Jobs [Guardian]
"Their 40s Just Seemed To Sneak Up On Them" [Salon]
Related: Moms Over 40 A Risky Trend [LA Times]

The problem here is the same problem with "chick lit". Just cuz you're chick who likes lit doesn't mean you're gonna like chick lit. And if you've given birth and like to read, does that mean you want to read about fictional moms and their wacky, plucky adventures?

Maybe it's to be expected after the bestseller I Don't Know How She Does It sold millions of copies worldwide. But is there something demeaning about being marketed to this way? Like, hey, you, with the womb: Got something for ya! You're gonna love it! On the other hand, is it refreshing to see that, since women buy 70 to 80% of fiction, they're being recognized? But do moms want to read about other moms? Or would they rather escape into a story about someone whose life is completely different from their own?

Book Roundup: Mommy Lit [USA Today]
Earlier: The Problem With Chick Lit

TMZ Creators' Next Target: Moms [Silicon Alley Insider]

I just went and filled in for someone teaching a workshop on choosing single motherhood. Even though the women I know who have done it are attractive, successful, great women, even though I hope that I fit into that description as well, and I don't feel like there is anything wrong with me, I went into that workshop expecting to see a bunch of losers. And I was surprised to see a bunch of really attractive, articulate, educated, successful women. And when I realized I was surprised, I thought: "What is the matter with you?"

And Baby Makes Two [Salon]

Less than a third of mothers with a baby get hands-on support from their own mum at least once a week. On the in-laws front, more than a third never help.

Look, we love modern conveniences, and we're not retro, but were mothers ever supposed to be home alone with the kids all day? We have fantasies that things used to be easier. Surely our tribal ancestors had kids and then went back to weaving, fishing, berry picking and stuff, while the tribal elders watched the kids over in the day-care hut? And maybe the infant mortality rate was high, and life expectancy was short, but no one felt isolated and alone while holding a screaming infant, and waiting for their husband to come home from boozing with the boys, right? Right?

Babies Destroy Social Life, Say New Mothers [Telegraph]