Answers attached.
Nice discussion Sonia. The allostatic load literature definitely emphasizes the effects of cumulative exposure to adversity on the person being exposed, not on his or her offspring, but the potential for intergenerational transmission of disadvantage created by the Weaver et al story is really important. This is (part of) why the epigenetic programming idea is so appealing in social epidemiology - if generalizable it can help explain several observations in health and social inequalities, such as the persistence of disadvantage across generations and the role of behavioral patterns in creating inequalities.
Much of the lifecourse literature distinguishes between "critical" and "sensitive" periods, with the idea that the correct exposure *MUST* happen in a critical period and if that developmental period is missed, it's just too late (think of bird song as the metaphor) versus sensitive periods in which exposure during that period is more influential than other periods, but you can still offset or make up for missed events.