Original post by poohatThis is missing the point - the study you are linking to shows that there is a difference between the brains of poor children, and non-poor children. Noone denies this. The issue is whether that difference is a result of environmental factors (i.e poverty), or whether it is a result of genetics (i.e. they inherited that brain structure from their parents). Nothing in that paper is relevant to that, while there is an enormous literature showing that shared environment (i.e. upbringing and parenting) doesnt play a huge role on most behavioral and cognitive traits.
Additionally, even if non-genetic differences do exist (which they almost certainly do), the next question is who's "fault" they are. Poverty itself does not have any causal effects - its not like £50 notes emit magical radiation which increases the intelligence of children growing up in households containing lots of them. In reality, the most likely channels for poverty to impede brain development are going to be a) the mother's behavior during pregnancy (poor mothers are more likely to be heavy smokers and drinkers), b) bad childhood nutrition, and c) bad parenting during the crucial early years of life (not reading to your children, not challenging them intellectually, etc). All of these basically fall under the heading of "bad parenting", and if poor families are more likely to be bad parents, then who's fault is this?
Note, by the way, that "poverty" doesnt seem to have had much effect on Indian immigrants, many of whom grew up in households earning income below the UK average, yet who now as a group have educational achievements and salary above the UK average.