Friday, August 21, 2026

When ‘but they’re your family’ isn’t reason enough to stay

A new book argues that some adult children are cutting ties with their families of origin in favor of safety, mutual respect and chosen family

Ohio State University

“She’s your mom.” “They’re your family.” “Blood is thicker than water.”

For generations, these familiar idioms have illustrated what Rin Reczek and Emma Bosley-Smith, co-authors of the 2022 book “Families We Keep: LGBTQ People and Their Enduring Bonds with Parents” (NYU Press), term compulsory kinship: the social expectation that biological and legal family ties must be preserved at all costs.

In their book, Reczek, a professor of sociology at The Ohio State University, and then-Ohio State doctoral student Emma Bosley-Smith (now an assistant professor at Alma College) examined the great effort adult children often make to maintain strained or painful ties with their families of origin. Now, in Reczek’s follow-up book, “Families We Lose: A New Explanation for Family Estrangement,” published this week by NYU Press, Reczek explores what happens when adult children decide that family obligation is no longer reason enough to stay.

Overall, her research has found that adult children who go “no contact” with one or both parents elect estrangement as a last resort, and to free themselves to create a chosen family environment that meets their needs.

Reczek has studied complex family dynamics for about 20 years, and she said that changing family structures often shoulder the blame for the social problems of our time. While researching “Families We Keep,” she was surprised by the lack of scholarly literature available on the topic of family estrangement. And when she looked at the current cultural conversations happening around adult children going “no contact” with family members — in the news, on podcasts, on social media, etc. — the dominant narrative was one of panic and stigmatization.

Family estrangement is the latest in a long history of what Reczek calls “family panics.” Take, for example, rising divorce rates. “When divorce rates were rising and we saw increases in states allowing no-fault divorce, we also saw a lot of panic around the fall, or decline, of the family,” she said.

According to prior research cited in the book, about 6% of U.S. adults are estranged from a mother, while roughly 23% are estranged from a father at some point in adulthood. Reczek notes there is no empirical evidence showing estrangement rates are surging.

As shifts in American family life stream across our 24/7 content feeds, historically private decisions become public conversations — and people can mistake them for the end of family life as we know it.

“To frame estrangement as just bad for society is inappropriate,” Reczek said. “When we see that kind of panic around it, it’s a signal that it’s touching on a change in how people think about family. Estrangement has been happening throughout history; maybe the publicness of it has become really scary to people.”

There’s an unspoken societal expectation that parents will take care of kids when they are little, and when those kids grow up, eventually the roles will reverse, with the kids caring for their aging parents. “Estrangement really cuts to the heart of that agreement, which never really was agreed upon by the child who was brought into the world,” Reczek said. “That is why it’s so painful for a lot of parents, understandably. They thought that their life would look a certain way, and now it doesn’t.”

In “Families We Lose” and a related article in the Journal of Marriage and Family, Reczek sought out the real-life stories behind the current estrangement panic. She conducted in-depth interviews with 68 estranged adults across the U.S. in 2023, tracing their family histories from childhood to the present day. Each participant was actively “no contact” with at least one family member, and their periods of estrangement ranged from short-term to decades-long, sometimes repeating in cyclical patterns.

The data shows that estrangement is rarely the direct result of a single childhood event, a social media trend or “therapy speak.” Instead, Reczek found it is driven by an unresolvable culture clash between those holding onto compulsory kinship and those embracing a different way of doing family: democratized kinship.

“If compulsory kinship creates the burns of inequality, then democratized kinship and its values of quality and equality are the balm,” she writes in “Families We Lose.” Familial relationships created under democratized kinship — with friends, co-workers, neighbors and others — are guided by shared values like accountability and growth, deep connection, mutual respect and safety. Estrangement, she argues, is caused by “the conflict that arises when one family member changes from compulsory to democratized kinship but the others fail to make the same transition.”

Reczek also debunks the myth that adult children who experience or initiate estrangement do so because they don’t care about family — that they’re selfish and individualistic. “That couldn’t be further from the truth,” she said. “They care so much about family. They want to have healthy families, and they have very high standards for what a healthy family is.”

Going no contact is rarely a spontaneous or easy decision. More often, it’s the final straw after years of mistreatment, miscommunication or boundary violations. Pundits have blamed mental health professionals for driving estrangement trends, but Reczek found nothing to validate that claim.

The people she spoke with described therapy as a space where they were able to work through some of the pain of their family relationships, and, through that process, learn more about the kinds of values that they had for their relationships. “It wasn't that the therapist was encouraging them to do anything,” Reczek said. “It was more that the therapist was teaching them about what healthy relationships could look like.”

Another powerful catalyst for adult children, Reczek found, is becoming a parent. Raising children brings memories of their upbringing into sharp relief, prompting them to set firm boundaries, or sever ties entirely, to protect the next generation from experiencing similar harm.

Ultimately, Reczek hopes the public conversation around estrangement moves toward a broader acceptance of modern family life — one that honors personal choice and agency in adult relationships.

“Maybe family doesn’t look like the way we thought it would, but it hardly ever does,” she said. “Being open to those possibilities is a really important thing for all of us.”

Contact: Rin Reczek: reczek.2@osu.edu

Written by Elizabeth Weinstein: weinstein.137@osu.edu

Company mergers can cut costs without cutting prices for consumers, study finds

University of East Anglia

Merging companies might become cheaper and more efficient to run, but savings are not necessarily passed onto shoppers – and in some cases customers end up paying more, according to new research.

The study examined what happened after pharmaceutical giants GSK and Pfizer combined their consumer healthcare businesses in 2019.

Researchers from Loughborough University, the University of East Anglia (UEA), the Philippine Competition Commission, the University of the Philippines and E.CA Economics – a BRG (Berkeley Research Group) company – in London, found that the deal appears to have made part of the combined business cheaper to operate.

However, those savings did not simply result in lower prices across the market. Instead, the price of medicines sold by one major rival increased substantially.

The findings, published in the Southern Economic Journal, could have important implications for competition authorities deciding whether to approve future mergers between large companies.

Lead author Prof Farasat Bokhari, from Loughborough University, said: “When companies want to merge, they can argue that combining their operations will create ‘efficiencies’.

“In simple terms, a bigger combined company might be able to manufacture, distribute or sell its products more cheaply.

“The argument is that these savings can compensate for the loss of competition caused by turning two competing businesses into one. But our new research suggests the reality can be more complicated.”

The researchers studied the prices of over-the-counter cough and cold medicines in the Philippines before and after GSK and Pfizer combined their consumer healthcare businesses in 2019.

The companies had predicted the deal would eventually save around £500 million a year.

The study found evidence that some efficiencies were real: the estimated cost of supplying Pfizer products fell by 9.43%, while their prices dropped by 6.57%.

Co-author Prof Sean Ennis, of UEA’s Norwich Business School, said: “We confirm efficiencies for one of the merging firms, something not widely studied. Nonetheless these did not ultimately lead to lower prices for all products.”

GSK's prices increased by an estimated 3.25%, while Sanofi, a major international competitor, raised its prices by 8.55%. Prices from cheaper local manufacturer Unilab remained broadly unchanged.

The researchers found evidence consistent with greater coordination between GSK/Pfizer and Sanofi after the merger.

“This does not mean the companies explicitly agreed on prices,” said Prof Bokhari. “Instead, having fewer independent competitors makes it easier for companies to coordinate on prices without explicitly agreeing to do so, which in turn means that prices are higher than what we would expect under competition.”

The findings suggest that mergers can create genuine savings without necessarily benefiting consumers.

The researchers argue that competition authorities should therefore consider not only whether a merger makes companies more efficient but also whether the merger makes coordination more likely and hence does not result in lower prices for the consumers.

‘Merger efficiency and coordinated effects: nothing to sneeze at? Evidence from cough and cold medicines in the Philippines’ is published in the Southern Economic Journal.

Journal

Southern Economic Journal

DOI

10.1002/soej.70063

Article Title

Merger efficiency and coordinated effects: nothing to sneeze at? Evidence from cough and cold medicines in the Philippines’

Article Publication Date

20-Aug-2026

National laboratory research collaboration focuses on accelerated qualification of critical nuclear components

National labs aim to grow U.S. energy supply chain

DOE/Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Wire-Arc Printing of Pressure Vessel — image:
ORNL’s MedUSA wire-arc printer used three coordinated robotic arms build a demonstration pressure vessel.
view more
Credit: Leslie Mullen/ORNL; U.S. Dept. of Energy

The Department of Energy's Oak Ridge and Idaho national laboratories announced a collaboration to expand the domestic supply chain of industrial pressure vessels. Together, the labs will help enable wire arc 3D printing of these large components, which are critical for energy-related industries and capable of reliably withstanding harsh service conditions. The initiative boosts the rapid expansion of U.S. nuclear manufacturing capabilities.

The labs announced the collaboration Aug. 19 at Materials and Manufacturing Innovation Days (M2IND). M2IND was an Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) event where industry, government and research community leaders discuss advancements in AI-enabled manufacturing, nuclear infrastructure, increased U.S. competitiveness, energy security, and domestic supply chains. The event included demonstrations and tours of user facilities such as DOE’s Manufacturing Demonstration Facility (MDF), the nation’s only large-scale, open-access research institution for early-stage advanced manufacturing technologies to be deployed by industry.

Pressure vessels operate under extreme conditions and require extraordinary toughness and structural integrity. They are made from forging, but limited domestic capacity poses a supply challenge as the U.S. works to rapidly expand its nuclear energy portfolio. Wire arc additive manufacturing, which 3D prints components with molten metal wire, may diversify manufacturing options to enable a domestic supply chain.

The labs will help industry develop this process by leveraging expertise in additive manufacturing and real-time accuracy monitoring, parts qualification, and nuclear material properties and their long-term performance.

As the nation’s lead laboratory for nuclear energy research and development, the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has decades of experience designing, developing, testing and deploying components and manufacturing technologies for nuclear reactors. INL’s work accelerates rapid advances in nuclear fission systems, including several recent advanced reactor criticality achievements and the agentic AI-focused Genesis Mission project, Prometheus INL will combine its expertise in AI, digital engineering and data science with ORNL’s leadership in additive manufacturing at the MDF.

“INL and its industry partners will accelerate development of new reactor designs, components and manufacturing methods by applying AI tools, such as those developed under Prometheus, to support the commercial adoption and deployment of nuclear energy and meet the growing needs of American communities, manufacturers and AI data centers,” said Shannon Bragg-Sitton, INL associate laboratory director for Energy and Environment Science and Technology.

ORNL conducts world-leading research in not only additive manufacturing but also the characterization of printed parts.

“ORNL’s unique strength is our ability to connect world-class science with the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility’s capabilities to move innovation from research to real-world impact,” said Robert Wagner, ORNL associate laboratory director for Energy Science and Technology. “By working with industry to demonstrate, validate and qualify advanced manufacturing technologies, we can reduce risk, accelerate deployment and strengthen the domestic supply chains essential to America’s energy future.”

Scaling up pressure vessel printing before focusing on qualification

In July, MDF scientists used wire arc 3D printing to manufacture a small nuclear pressure vessel displayed at M2IND. The component, which measures about 3 feet by 5 feet, marks an early milestone in pressure vessel research by demonstrating the ability to scale up the technology.

The demonstration confirmed the ability to print a large, closed vessel with a steel alloy relevant to nuclear applications on ORNL’s MedUSA platform, which uses three coordinated robotic arms to build complex parts by melting wire with electric arcs.

Researchers are now working to demonstrate that AI-empowered digital tools can verify the shape and material properties of the vessel during printing. “We would like to achieve born-qualified pressure vessel components using data gathered during printing to confidently assess their worthiness for extreme environments,” said ORNL lead researcher Patxi Fernandez-Zelaia.

As an early step in the current initiative, ORNL used the same MedUSA printer and material in the AI-accelerated production of neutron sensor brackets for Antares Nuclear Inc.’s R1 Mark-0, a novel microreactor design that reached criticality at INL in June.

Solutions that streamline qualifying nuclear components will help the nation deploy nuclear reactor technology faster. “With this project, we’re bringing together expertise from both labs to integrate AI and data science with advanced 3D printing so we can evaluate a part’s performance in real time, while it’s being printed, instead of waiting for post-production testing,” said Jorgen Rufner, INL group lead for advanced manufacturing and a specialist in harsh environment materials.

In the future, the printing and verification methods could apply to other components for nuclear reactors. But beyond nuclear energy, they could benefit other industries that rely on large metal structural components including chemical refining, oil and gas, defense and aerospace.

About Idaho National Laboratory

Battelle Energy Alliance manages INL for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy. INL is the nation’s center for nuclear energy research and development, and also performs research in each of DOE’s strategic goal areas: energy, national security, science and the environment. For more information, visit www.inl.gov. Follow us on social media: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and X.

About Oak Ridge National Laboratory

UT-Battelle manages ORNL for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States. The Office of Science is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit energy.gov/science.
— S. Heather Duncan

The model pressure vessel printed at ORNL showed that a nuclear-appropriate metal alloy could be formed into a complex domed shape.

Credit

Leslie Mullen/ORNL; U.S. Dept. of Energy

ORNL and INL research teams and leadership pose with a 3D-printed pressure vessel at ORNL during Materials and Manufacturing Innovation Days 2026 on Aug. 19, 2026.

Credit

Carlos Jones/ORNL, U.S. Dept. of Energy

Brain imaging study reveals how we decide whether we are in control

University of Oxford

Set up of FMRI Imaging — image:
Set up of FMRI imaging. Credit: John Cairns
view more
Credit: John Cairns

A study led by the University of Oxford has identified the brain mechanisms that help us work out whether the consequences we experience are caused by our own actions or by circumstances beyond our control.

The study, published today (21 August) in Neuron, found that both confidence in our own decisions and estimates of external circumstances provide important clues. When people were confident in a decision but received an unexpected negative outcome, they were more likely to attribute it to external circumstances. On the other hand, when they were less certain about their decision, they were more likely to consider their own performance as the cause.

Participants made these conclusions partly because they tracked how certain they were about their own performance throughout the assessment even before they obtained any feedback.

Using ultra-high-field brain imaging and targeted non-invasive brain stimulation, the researchers identified two prefrontal-subcortical brain circuits involved in this process. The findings provide new insight into how our sense of control is formed and how it subsequently shapes learning from success and failure.

One of the brain areas the researchers highlight is linked to brain chemicals that are the focus of many treatments for depression. This brain area signals when there are changes in how controllable the world seems to us.

Lead author Dr Yanhe Liu (Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford) said: “Knowing whether an outcome was caused by us or by something outside our control is fundamental to learning. If an archer misses a target, for example, they need to decide whether to correct their technique or compensate for an external factor such as the wind. Making the wrong attribution could lead them to learn the wrong lesson.”

In the study, adult participants completed a decision-making task in which they judged whether there were more blue or orange dots on a screen and rated how confident they were in each choice. They then received feedback on whether their answer was correct.

Crucially, the reliability of this feedback changed. In ‘controllable’ blocks, feedback reflected participants’ actual performance on 90% of trials. In ‘uncontrollable’ blocks, this was true on only 10% of trials, with the remaining feedback generated randomly. Participants were not told which type of block they were in, but had to learn this from experience.

The researchers found that people used their confidence to help work out what had caused an outcome. When participants were highly confident but received unexpected negative feedback, they were more likely to conclude that it had been generated randomly. When they were less confident, they were more likely to attribute negative feedback to their own performance. At the same time, they used these experiences to continually update their estimate of how much control they generally had over the external circumstance.

Using an ultra-high-resolution functional MRI scanner in 22 participants, the researchers traced this process to a circuit connecting the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) with the dorsal raphe nucleus, a small structure deep in the brain. Activity in the dmPFC tracked participants’ confidence, their estimate of how much control they had, and whether they attributed an outcome to their own performance or to randomness.

A second circuit, connecting another region of the prefrontal cortex with dopamine-associated regions of the midbrain, was linked to how these judgements influenced the brain’s response to feedback.

The researchers then tested the role of the dmPFC directly in a separate experiment with 20 participants. Temporarily disrupting activity in this region using non-invasive magnetic brain stimulation made participants slower to work out whether the feedback they were receiving genuinely reflected their performance or was mostly random. This provides strong evidence that the dmPFC is important for judging what is and is not within our control.

Co-author Professor Matthew Rushworth (Department of Experimental Biology, University of Oxford) said: “Our sense of control has profound consequences for how we behave. If we believe an outcome was caused by our own actions, it makes sense to change those actions next time. If we believe it was caused by something outside our control, the appropriate response may be very different. This study begins to reveal the brain circuitry that enables us to make that distinction.”

The findings could ultimately help researchers better understand why people's perceptions of control can sometimes become distorted. Altered perceptions of control and causal attribution have been associated with conditions including depression, anxiety and schizophrenia, although the researchers stress that the present study investigated healthy adults and was not designed to test clinical interventions. Nevertheless, the dorsal raphe nucleus – one of the areas the researchers highlight – is strongly linked to serotonin, which is the focus of some of the most common treatments for depression such as SSRIs.

Dr Liu added: “The ability to distinguish what we can control from what we cannot is central to adapting successfully to the world around us. Understanding the brain mechanisms behind that judgement gives us a foundation for investigating what happens when this process becomes biased or disrupted.”

Notes to editors:

For media enquiries and interview requests, contact news.office@admin.ox.ac.uk

The study ‘Two prefrontal-subcortical circuits estimate controllability and reflect its impact on learning’ will be published in Neuron at 16:00 BST / 11:00 ET on Friday 21 August 2026, DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2026.07.029 To view a copy of the paper before this under embargo, access the Cell Press tipsheet on EurekAlert or contact news.office@admin.ox.ac.uk

The study was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC; grant BB/W003392/1) and Wellcome (grant 221794/Z/20/Z).

About the University of Oxford

Oxford University has been placed number 1 in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for the tenth year running, and number 3 in the QS World Rankings 2024. At the heart of this success are the twin-pillars of our ground-breaking research and innovation and our distinctive educational offer.

Oxford is world-famous for research and teaching excellence and home to some of the most talented people from across the globe. Our work helps the lives of millions, solving real-world problems through a huge network of partnerships and collaborations. The breadth and interdisciplinary nature of our research alongside our personalised approach to teaching sparks imaginative and inventive insights and solutions.

Through its research commercialisation arm, Oxford University Innovation, Oxford is the highest university patent filer in the UK and is ranked first in the UK for university spinouts, having created more than 300 new companies since 1988. Over a third of these companies have been created in the past five years. The university is a catalyst for prosperity in Oxfordshire and the United Kingdom, contributing around £16.9 billion to the UK economy in 2021/22, and supports more than 90,400 full time jobs.