
Dear founders: Children are not a distraction, they are motivation - tzaman
http://zaman.io/dear-founders-children-are-not-a-distraction-they-are-motivation/
======
FD3SA
It's astounding that we have come so far that this needs to be defended.
Throughout history, civilizations which held the nuclear family as their most
important asset have absolutely dominated the world. This is due to simple
evolutionary forces, which for K-selected species, favor fewer offspring which
have much longer weaning periods. As a result, parents who invested more in
providing their offspring with education and sustenance did substantially
better as a society than their competitors.

It is quite ironic that the vast wealth accumulated by the western world,
which was built upon the nuclear family as its foundation, has now allowed the
next generation such freedom that they can dally as singles for significant
portions of their lives. That being said, singles are very productive in short
bursts, but these are unstable and fuelled by emotional insecurity which, as
mentioned in the article, inevitably lead to burnout.

Society will inevitably return to its nuclear family origins, as the fun
loving singles will not provide offspring in quality and quantity to compete
with these traditional families.

Moral of the story: don't be so quick to condemn the old ways of family life.
They have survived for millenia, and will continue to do so long after we're
gone.

~~~
mullingitover
> It is quite ironic that the vast wealth accumulated by the western world,
> which was built upon the nuclear family as its foundation, has now allowed
> the next generation such freedom that they can dally as singles for
> significant portion of their lives.

Freedom? More like not being able to afford the expenses of having a family.

I'm 36 and make above the average income for a person in Los Angeles, but I
can't afford a house and can't fathom trying to raise a family on my income.
It would basically be a choice between having children or having a retirement.
If this is freedom, I hope I don't get any more liberated than I already am.

~~~
cylinder
How did this rule come about, that you need to own a house before you can have
a child?

~~~
MartinCron
It's very easy to fall into the notion that you need to have ALL of your ducks
in a row before having (planned) children. My wife and I called it "the
tyranny of the ducks" and eventually learned to push back a bit. In our case,
it was not freaking out over putting a car seat in the back of a small 2-door
car instead of a big 4-door car.

~~~
aspensmonster
Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn't that high on
the priority list :P

However, ensuring that you can still afford to pay all the bills for months
--or years, preferably-- on end in the event that your source of income
disappears... that seems to be the most important of the ducks. Whether it's a
home you own or six months' mortgage/rent is just details.

~~~
MartinCron
_Of all the ducks, I think the number of doors on the car isn 't that high on
the priority list :P_

Have you ever tried to put an infant car seat in the back of a 1994 Mazda MX-6
coupe? It might change your priority list.

------
toast76
Couldn't agree more. I've often been asked by other founders whether running a
startup w/kids is possible. It's hard, but not for the reasons most people
without kids would think.

I moved interstate for 3 months to take part in an accelerator, and had to
drag my son and pregnant wife with me. That was hard (mostly on them!)

When I was pitching for investment in the US (we're Aussies) and missed my
sons 2nd birthday, it nearly broke me in two.

When I went to the US to participate in 500 Startups, 6 weeks after my wife
had given birth to our daughter. That was incredibly hard...for everybody.

12 months ago when I didn't take a paycheck for a month, knowing I was failing
my family, that was the hardest.

Right now I'm in Sydney, away from my wife and kids, I will miss my Son's
karate grading... and I feel like a terrible father for doing so.

But here's the thing. All these things are hard, and I do them because they
have to be done. Not because "it might be fun" or "just to see what happens",
but because these things will lead us to success.

The bar for what constitutes a worthwhile activity is raised so much higher
when you have a family to support. You learn to be more critical on evaluating
opportunities, and you only jump when you need to jump. It doesn't cripple
you, it forces you to focus on things that move the dial.

~~~
j_s
> The bar for what constitutes a worthwhile activity is raised so much higher
> when you have a family to support.

That should be sentence #1.

~~~
je42
Yep! I was away for 2 times 2 1/2 months from my wife and kids in 6 month
period. I was constantly evaluating if this was still worth it.

------
akerl_
Why do we need this to be a hard line? Putting "having kids kills startups" on
one side and "parents are the best founders" on the other seems to be at best
an oversimplification and at worst outright detrimental to both groups. I'm
pretty sure most everybody here knows somebody who got motivated after having
kids (or any other major life event), as well as somebody who became less
motivated in their own career after such an event.

I get that putting everybody into cute little boxes with solid walls
separating them from the other groups makes things easier on our brains, but
we'd probably be a lot better off if we tried to imagine others complexly,
because that's the reality.

~~~
phillmv
Well, because right now as it stands _the default_ is to be hostile to people
with kids. And frankly, if our business culture _needs_ to exploit childless
20 year olds then we're building a toxic, unsustainable environment.

~~~
x0x0
Yeah, but here's the other side of the coin: I've worked with parents (and
shared a boss) who always dumped shitwork off onto the people w/o kids. Last
second travel to customers, late nights, bugs that trigger support SLA
requirements, emergency fixes, etc. And then, amazingly enough, proceed to
whine that they don't get the same raises or promotions.

I agree our work environment is hostile to people's personal lives, but when
parents use their kids as an excuse to get out of doing their share, instead
of advocating for better work life balance for everyone, the reaction of the
childless should be completely unsurprising.

~~~
akerl_
Are you really going to make the case that people with children are more
likely to dump work on people without children? _Really?_

Do you have any sort of actual evidence to support this? (Actual evidence, not
anecdotal stories about how somebody with a kid made you do more work on a
project once)

~~~
FedRegister
Can't speak for the previous poster, but my company has a strict policy -
people with children get first consideration for time off. When there is
inclement weather, they're the first sent home to take care of their children.
When there is extra work to be done, the person with children is the first to
be exempt from overtime.

So at my company there is a very strict policy about this, and it gets
followed to a T.

~~~
RobotCaleb
Are you okay with this policy?

------
adrianonantua
Totally relate. My two year old son actually __prevents __me from burning out.
Everyday, when I get home, my wife says "your turn!" and I transform into
Daddy. We play soccer, we play music, we play, I bathe him, I feed him, I tuck
him in.

Code? What cod... wait, right, I'm a developer. Gosh, that problem I'm stuck
at is really diffic... Wait, I got it! I know what way to go now and try to
solve that.

Thanks, son!

~~~
Tyrant505
Great comment that should be obvious but is often "forgotten." Tunnel vision
will lead you to tunnels and not vast, mighty oceans.

~~~
je42
Yep. Forced breaks can be annoying, but to reach the "water" you sometimes
have to wait for the tide.

------
l33tbro
Children aren't the issue - partners are.

Yes, you'll be inspired to provide for your family being in start-up mode. It
probably will push you harder than if you weren't nested. But, convetionally,
your partner will encourage you to engage in much more stable financial
endeavours (ie, anything but start-ups).

As they should too. Why? Because, let's face it; most people's ideas are
pretty shitty. That's not a secret around here ... so let's put that out
there. As we know, even if you do have a super great idea, there is so much
luck required to break through.

I don't mean to sound grinchy on a Ycombinator forum, but let's just address
the reality here. The times we live in is where The Social Network has become
like a founding myth of a 21st century goldrush. People are over educated and
bored with job-jobs, so wishful thinking pushes them into developing their
genius apps and half-baked Facebook killers.

I don't want to discourage people from being creative and innovative, but I
think all of this has to be considered in this discussion of raising a family
and doing something extremely financially risky like a startup.

~~~
rayiner
> Children aren't the issue - partners are.

It depends on your specific situation. Kids will generally make you more risk
averse, but working partners will make you less risk averse. The founder at
the startup where I worked (who had three kids at the time), was able to
bootstrap because his wife's job was enough to pay the mortgage and health
insurance.

I personally feel a lot more empowered to make risky career moves because my
wife could support the family by herself if need be.

------
avalaunch
I've posted this before but it seems relevant here to highlight the prejudice
that people with families will sometimes face.

Ripped directly from a rejection letter I received:

"I think instead of making a more detailed offer, I should consider certain
facts.

For starters, you have a family and that'll be the driving force behind all
your decisions. Secondly, you will not be able to be here in the program with
me. Ideally, I want someone who could be here though not necessary. More
importantly, it's the family situation I consider. I've worked developers
before with family and the company died largely because of that. I don't want
to say that'll happen but I worry.

This other candidate is like me. No responsibilities except {COMPANY NAME}.
That makes life less complicated. Based on this - nothing to do with skills -
it's best that him and I work together. "

The program was one of the startup accelerators (not YC). He was right that my
family would have been the driving force behind all my decisions. He was wrong
in thinking that's a bad thing. I can't imagine a bigger motivator than my
family. When you have kids, failure just isn't an option.

~~~
robrenaud
> When you have kids, failure just isn't an option.

Then it seems that startups are a pretty bad choice for parents, given their
inherent riskiness?

~~~
kjs3
Only if you assume you're going to fail. No entrepreneur goes into it thinking
it's not going to work out. The difference is that a parent doesn't say
"things look rough...fuck it, I'll sleep on a friends couch for a couple of
weeks, go to some networking events and start something different". We're in
for the long haul.

------
sz4kerto
Yeah, I thought the joy over kids is sometimes just a self-delusion or a way
of resolve cognitive dissonance (as a lot of time is 'lost'). Obviously I
can't prove what I'm saying, but 1) it's an infinite source of happiness and
joy 2) my wife can actually work much more efficiently since she takes care of
her, as somehow she's not that distracted in her (less) 'free time'.

~~~
mattgreenrocks
Don't forget #3: careerism's benefits are vastly overstated in culture because
that's what Western society fixates on. Reading LinkedIn's 'influencer'
articles makes me want to vomit: yet another treatise on why I'm not working
hard enough to get the precious corner office or that promotion. (Who writes
this crap?)

As I get older I get wiser, and I'm not so stupidly entertained by the
occasional trinkets thrown to me by my career. Everything works better when
it's in it's proper place -- balanced. It took several years of imbalance,
lots of misplaced ambition, and a severe burnout to realize this. I don't
expect that I would have figured it out until I experienced it firsthand.

It's just a job. It doesn't define you, and you don't _have_ to make a
difference to be a worthwhile person.

~~~
dasil003
Also one of the benefits of being a programmer is that "working smarter, not
harder" is really a thing. If you're blessed with the curiosity and tenacity
that being a programmer requires, then reflecting and improving your craft can
make outsize returns far more than simply grinding yourself down to a nubbin
(which for some jobs in some places is the only way to survive).

~~~
mattgreenrocks
Exactly. I put a lot of time and thinking into music because it gives the
developer side of me time to breathe, think, and ruminate on the hammock to
arrive at better insights.

I think a lot of this "always on" crap that people want to think they have to
do stems from insecurity. Definitely do side projects/open source/other things
as you want to, but it's not required in any form. The result is substantially
better when you do it because you really want to, not because you're trying to
level up your resume.

------
darklajid
My take: I got two kids, one's not yet 1.5 years old, the other one is a month
old.

It's hard. I have tremendous respect for my wife, because - she's the one
spending the most time with the kids. That said: I do work from home and this
DOES influence my ability to work.

I wouldn't want to miss them. They are great. I agree with the OP that they
help you in some ways (keeping a schedule, logistics, making sure that you're
not slacking off during the day and getting into a frenzy mode at night).

But they have a ( _cough_ ) cost. I'm looking left and right for a job that
would make me happier. I usually don't even dare to send an application
(because hey, could I actually take it? I mean.. probation time etc. even if
they'd take me in) and if I do I usually know that I won't risk it either.

The big risk is not productivity. That can be avoided and a decent structure
(support in your family, a good understanding with your SO) solves most of the
standard "But aren't kids dragging you down?" issues.

But flexibility is truly lost, unless you have lots of savings or your SO
earns enough money (BZZZZT). At this point in time I'm absolutely certain that
I'll never start a company of my own (okay, okay, let's be honest: The kids
are not to blame for most of the issues: I don't even have a decent idea. I'm
saying: I wouldn't, even with the perfect pitch) and I'm even reasonably sure
that I'll stick with my current company for a loooong time.

For safety, family. I just cannot experiment anymore.

~~~
celticninja
i am just about to change my career, i have 3 kids under 4. it is a huge risk,
but the potential reward is also huge. why am i doing it? well the pay off
would be a much better life for my family than is currently possible. i am
giving up promotion and stability for a sideways move and retraining. the fact
i have kids is what is driving me to experiment rather than seek safety.

~~~
humanrebar
This isn't a problem that good savings can't solve. If it's too hard to come
up with savings, the cost of having a family of three is probably too high.

I'm not denigrating families of three, I'm criticizing the way current costs
and benefits of Western governments make it too expensive for responsible
people to have decent-sized families.

------
steven2012
The real factor is whether or not your spouse takes care of the children
completely. Or if you have your parents at home taking care of the kids.

Because from my own experience, taking care of a newborn with the two spouses
both working demanding jobs is extremely, extremely hard. It's just about the
hardest thing I've ever done, and my wife agrees. We are both exhausted every
day, weekends are even harder than the weekdays, and time to ourselves is the
most precious commodity we have and the thing we have the least of.

If you can't have your parents take care of the kid during the day, or if you
can't afford a nanny, then the issues related to day care compound the
situation a great deal.

If one of the spouses agrees to completely take care of the kid, it makes it a
lot easier to spend the extra energy, because it gives you the flexibility
required to do things that startups need. The thing that is the most limiting
is time and schedule flexibility, and energy. Without that flexibility, the
ability to go beyond what is expected is extremely hard, in my own experience.

------
dasil003
What having a daughter (almost 5) taught me is how to time box. To some extent
you can hack it with pomodoro technique or other mental tricks, but there's
nothing like a hard out to keep efficiency at the front of mind. I do now in 8
hours what I used to do in 12 because I figured I had all night.

------
mavdi
People with no kids, please don't listen to anyone telling you how a great
source of motivation these adorable little prats are. I've personally been
fucked in so many unimaginable since my kid was born. Really think about it
hard before committing to such madness.

------
pbharrin
Awesome. A great professor said the best grad students were the married ones
because they knew how to manage time. I believe the same is true for founders
with kids.

------
guard-of-terra
It seems to a childless me that today society forces you to spend unrealistic
amount of time on children.

Looking after them, hauling them around, catering to their needs. If you don't
do that you are suspicious and may even become a criminal: How dare you leave
your 10yo kid alone and let her use internets unsupervised?

I'm not sure I want that. It wasn't like that when I was a kid, I came from
school on foot, boiled some food, made homework while parents were busy making
money, even helped them with that a bit. Now it's supposed to be one way
street.

If society want everybody to have children they should whoa whoa take it easy.

~~~
jordan0day
Even if you hadn't pointed out that you didn't have children, the rest of your
comment made it plain.

Society doesn't force you to spend an "unrealistic amount of time on
children", if anything, it's the opposite, forcing you to spend too much time
away from them.

There's nothing wrong with making sure your children are independent and can
do things on their own, and by the age of 10 I'd expect them to be capable of
quite a bit of independence. However, even at that age, they're still
aggregating _enormous_ of new information about the world, daily. You should
around to help guide them, teach them, or just be a sounding board for them to
bounce ideas off of.

You seem to be confusing normal child rearing with the "helicopter parent"
meme.

You should especially re-read your own sentence: "Looking after them, hauling
them around, catering to their needs. If you don't do that you are suspicious
and may even become a criminal"

 _catering to their needs_. Well I certainly hope if you have children you'd
be willing to meet their needs!

~~~
tlear
Children actually have quite basic needs. Helicopter over protective parents
are meme but also a reality as well. One of my friends spent 2k on a
stroller.. another has 4 strollers.. another bought a 35k car because his
current 4 year old Civic was not comfortable enough for his one kid (he has no
savings)

Children require you to feed, them have roof over their head, have clothing
and teach them stuff by example. They do not require you to follow them around
24/7 making sure they don't get hurt or come into contact with outside world.

When we had our kid I was really afraid that somehow I will turn into one of
those crazy friends I have. It did not happen.. keeping wife from going there
is taking some effort though.

------
spoiledtechie
Totally agree with the Op. I work hard for my kids. Its not about me anymore.
Its about a better life for our family now.

~~~
nsxwolf
And this is a horrifying thought for a 20-something with no kids and what they
perceive as limitless freedom, opportunity, and immortality.

Having a family and shifting into an "it's not about me anymore" frame of mind
probably sounds worse than death to them. I know it would have at one point in
my life.

------
biesnecker
Absolutely. My (2) kids definitely require my attention and devotion, but in
terms of "getting me focused on the important stuff," they are miracle
workers.

Having a supportive spouse is an amazing boon, too, and one that should not be
overlooked in this discussion.

------
batoure
The thing that strikes me about arguments like these is that they are
fundamentally one sided. Without even getting into the walking confirmation
bias of using your self as an example, the author sets this up so that a
simple proportion of people who will just flat out disagree.

When it really comes down to it starting something is really about the passion
to do it. If you want to succeed the thing you want to succeed at needs to be
an idea that you can't get out of your head. So that when you are playing with
your kids or managing your bowling league your subconscious brain continues to
work away at the idea of moving your business forward.

I have known people who tried to start businesses with kids and succeeded I
have also known people who start businesses with kids and fail miserably.

In the end it is because having kids or not having kids is going to have
nothing to do with your success or failure. Being dedicated and inspired to
succeed will.

Maybe you get your inspiration from your kids as the OP does, or maybe you
just really want to see the world with another web framework. Either way, if
you truly want it to happen then you will make a version of it work.

------
robgering
I have several kids. I spend a lot of time with them, regularly, and this is
non-negotiable, according to the personal philosophies I hold. It's also more
enjoyable than time spent doing really anything else. Ostensibly, I have less
time for coding or other activities involved with building a business.

However, having children has increased my motivation and productivity. It's as
if limiting available time increases the quantity of available focus. I am
also significantly more disciplined than I was as a childless bachelor. I
taught myself to code after having my first child.

A tip for new parents: if you can, get up early rather than staying up late to
work on your personal projects. This has two advantages: 1) your best effort
will be given to your own projects; and 2) you won't be looking forward to
getting away from your family to do work after hours.

I'm not making the argument that any person will be more productive with kids.
Just retelling my experience.

------
analog31
What do wages say about the relative productivity of people with and without
kids? So far as I know people with kids tend to earn more. I once read about a
study, finding that among unskilled single women in a neighborhood in Chicago,
those with kids tended to have higher wage jobs.

Some anecdata: I had a very comfortable engineering job when my first kid was
born, but it was pretty much dead-end in terms of salary. I re-evaluated my
career, and applied for a higher paying job that is widely regarded as being
difficult, boring, political, and stressful.

All of the applicants, and from what I can tell, virtually all of the people
who hold those crappy but higher paying jobs, have kids. I asked a bachelor
why he didn't apply for the job, and he said: "Are you kidding me, I want to
enjoy my evenings and weekends, and I have no reason to make more money."

------
pyalot2
Leonardo Da Vinci would disagree. In a letter to his brother he answered him
to the news of the birth of his nephew, that he had created himself a great
distraction.

~~~
Maxious
> My most beloved brother,

> This is sent merely to inform you that a short time ago I received a letter
> from you from which I learnt that you have had an heir, which circumstance I
> understand has afforded you a great deal of pleasure. Now in so far as I had
> judged you to be possessed of prudence I am now entirely convinced that I am
> as far removed from having an accurate judgment as you are from prudence;
> seeing that you have been congratulating yourself in having created a
> watchful enemy, who will strive with all his energies after liberty, which
> can only come into being at your death.

[http://archive.org/stream/notebooksofleona027479mbp/notebook...](http://archive.org/stream/notebooksofleona027479mbp/notebooksofleona027479mbp_djvu.txt)

Harsh stuff.

------
aortega
I'm the founder of a moderately sucessful infosec startup, and my child was
born at the same time. It was hard for everybody. Lets face it, startups take
much more time than a regular job, and we don't have any of the state-given
benefits.

One important rule that I have is minimize the time away from home. I have to
travel a lot and I've found that for kids, time perception is different than
for adults. A week seems short time for a 35 year old, but it's an eternity
for a toddler. For that reason I try to stay away from home only the necessary
time and not a single hour more. Thats a limitation that I try to balance
offering experience and profesionality.

And also, I always try to come back with a lot of gifts :)

------
solve
> I know this because I used to be that person, until I met my wife who showed
> me there's more to life than getting drunk every weekend.

There's an overpowering tendency to solve for a perfect "steady state"
solution to optimizing one's behavior. You see this tendency in nutrition,
psychology, everywhere in relation to biological things.

It's dead wrong.

Sometimes "cycling" between states is the optimal approach, not steady-state
do one thing, eat one thing, etc. Variety can help you more consistently reach
your goals. Forcing yourself to totally unwind can allow you to focus more
intensely for much longer without burning out. I quite dislike this myth that
you have to be boring to be successful.

~~~
tzaman
Agreed, maybe I didn't express it right, I don't perceive myself as boring in
any way, drinking got replaced by skydiving haha :)

~~~
solve
Nice. That'll do it.

------
adventured
Actually, whether children are a distraction or a motivation varies from one
person to the other. There is no right answer that covers everybody.

Children would be a distraction to me right now. I know myself better than
anybody else knows me, and I'm the only one that can rationally judge this
_for me_.

Over the prior 15 years, I couldn't have lived the way I chose to, or made the
business/life decisions I did, while being responsible, if I had had children.
That included being so strapped I could barely feed myself, much less
children. It would have been wildly ignorant to have had a child at that
point.

------
kashkhan
If you do a startup while having a family, you are either desperate (can't get
a decent job) or truly motivated by your idea (in the way true believers are
and don't get a job by choice).

~~~
robgering
A false dichotomy. Plenty of people with both families and decent jobs choose
to start successful, sustainable, and profitable businesses each year. Some of
these people are "true believers" in their ideas, and some have other
motivators, like potential profits. Not all startups are an all-or-nothing
proposition. Nor should they be.

~~~
PeterisP
Pretty much _all_ new businesses, no matter if they're tech startups or corner
stores, have 80+% chance of failing within their first year. You don't get to
choose to start a profitable business - you can put your best effort to try
and make it so, but even that is just a gamble.

If your family can afford the income hit during a failed company without the
kids suffering - that's great. But if it can't, but you simply believe that it
_will_ be successful - then that's just lying to them and yourself.

~~~
robgering
You are right that people don't choose to start profitable businesses. They
aim for profitability. Perhaps I should have written "...choose to start
businesses, a few of which will become successful, sustainable, and
profitable." But this does not change the fact that the original comment by
kashkhan is logically flawed. Starting a business with a family is not
necessarily an act of desperation or true belief; it's often a part-time
endeavor, completed in addition to familial and work duties with the hope of
becoming something more. That one must quit one's day job and dedicate
90-hour-plus weeks to properly do a startup is a myth propagated by venture
capitalists who want quick returns on their investments.

~~~
kashkhan
The intent of startups in the Hacker News context is not mere profitability. I
can start selling fruit from a bike part time on the side and make a profit
but I don't think many here will count that as a startup.

The intent of startups is to make it big. To make it big, 100% effort is a
requirement. I am not discounting people who can do 200% (two jobs) but if you
want to do a fulltime job plus a startup plus give time to your family, and do
all three adequately, you'd have to be superman who needs no sleep. For the
rest of us mortals with families that we want to live with and not merely
exist with, two full time jobs, one of which is a startup is not possible. We
might do it transitionally, but not more than a few months.

------
Einstalbert
Founders are, more often than not and perhaps even as-written, passionate
people. People who have drive, focus, and a vision. For some people, their
drive comes from their families. For others, it doesn't. All I am seeing in
this thread is parents speaking up about how their children are their drive.
That's really cool, but to also turn around and state that people without
families walk an inevitable path to burnout is ridiculous to me. This thread
is little more than an echo chamber.

------
rayiner
I don't know if I buy the pitch in the article 100%, but it makes some good
points.

I did find one quote in the article particularly interesting: "Immediately one
of the more prominent HN members pointed out that I'm somehow at a
disatvantage since there's a version of me out there without being burdened by
having to support a family and thus has a bigger chance of success."

I would say that all else being equal, you are more likely to be successful in
launching a startup if you don't have kids. That said, everything is rarely
equal. I don't know too many people in my age group who devote themselves 100%
to work. Even if they're a miserable person with no hobbies, they at the very
least spend a lot of time trying to find relationships. If they don't, it has
a really negative effect on their emotional state. They spend a lot more time
with friends to get all the necessary social interaction. In other words,
unless you're extremely introverted, having a family isn't purely a cost on
your time--it satisfies certain emotional and social needs that would
otherwise take time to meet.

------
VaedaStrike
My, at times perceived, 'neglecting' of past jobs in favor of being available
for my wife and son is the very reason my wage has tripled and I'm now doing
the work I love. Getting let go from two jobs were the best things to happen
to my career AND my dreams of starting a start-up. If it wasn't for the focus
that having a family to provide for, and build a future for, I personally
would not have the ambition to take the risks and work and push myself like I
have. I wouldn't be a programmer and I wouldn't still have the vision of the
company and future I intend to create.

Children are startups. They are practices for startups. They entail
commitment, chaos, emotional chaos, growth and faith and all that effort and
sweat and tears and you don't have a clue as to how they are going to turn out
until many many years and tears into the project. And even then it's still a
guess as to where things will go.

And, at the end of the day, every innovator and humanity builder was a kid.
Even if my startup doesn't go where I hope it will, I've got eggs in more than
one basket. :)

------
vacri
Anecdote != data, and speaking as someone in his early 40s, who's single and
childless, you do grow out of that "drunk every weekend" phase fairly quickly.
Or at least, it's 'quickly' from where I'm standing. It gets increasingly
rarer from your late 20s onwards, whether you have children or not.

~~~
kjs3
Since you're going to provide nothing but anecdote after condescending with !=
data, I'll provide mine. As someone in his late 40s, the majority of my age
and social group who are "single and childless" are poor impulse control horny
drunks. Love every one of them, but it is what it is. The second most numerous
are gay, many of whom are now becoming not-single as laws change. Most of the
remainder are sociopaths. But anecdote != data so feel free to pretend my
reality doesn't exist.

~~~
vacri
Next time you accuse someone of being condescending, perhaps don't do it
yourself in response. Lead by example rather than respond in the same kind
that you deride.

~~~
kjs3
So you being condescending is fine, but me returning the favor is worthy of a
snotty, feigned hi-brow response. You're a hypocrite, as well as
condescending.

~~~
vacri
Well, yes. If you're going to ping someone for a misdeed, don't turn around
and do it yourself. That's what being a hypocrite is. Ironic that first you
ping be for being condescending, and then when it's pointed out that you're
doing the same, you then hypocritically accuse me of being a hypocrite. Ironic
also that you ping me for not being able to take criticism, but you've got to
lash out if you're criticised yourself.

And, frankly, screw the anti-intellectualism that considers that remark of
mine a 'high-brow' response.

------
hayksaakian
"think of the children" works for a reason

~~~
dromidas
Hitler used it to great effect... was actually one of his primary tools.

~~~
vezzy-fnord
Hitler also ate food.

Children's interests is a very tired and aggravating rhetorical tool,
certainly, but putting a _reductio ad Hitlerum_ into everything isn't doing
anything but showing your lack of imagination or your ideological
stubbornness.

------
drawkbox
Kids are magical motivators and when you have one you become a much more aware
person of others needs. I think this helps in every aspect of life.

Most of the product shippers I know have kids, you also have to put up with
less single person life troubles at work (you think hearing about people's
kids is annoying...).

When you have a kid the focus is immediately off yourself and on the work to
make that kid smile as much as possible and have a happy life. I have also
found that married programmers seem to stick around longer and are less flaky
because they have to be.

People that think kids are a distraction probably don't have them.

------
trendoid
It really depends on what ones priorities are. If someone is really in the
middle of starting up or even immensely enjoying the current work that she
ends up spending most of the time in office, why the hell would you want kids?

Raising decent kids requires proper planning and you need time to observe them
and change those plans accordingly if required. Only when you have decided to
chill down on work and consider yourself ready for another interesting venture
should you go ahead and have kids. Think about your priorities, period.

------
runewell
This can go many ways. I would say on average a startup is unhealthy for
someone with kids but if you're a highly organized and motivated person it
isn't that difficult.

------
harel
Each child you have is one more reason to 'make it'. They are the main
motivation of my work. Without them I don't know how motivated I would be to
succeed.

------
aantix
I think there's a lot of money to be made adopting the Y-Combinator model but
betting on startups with those with families.

------
greghinch
Elon Musk has 5 sons (!). It that doesn't prove that children being a
distraction is a fallacy, what will?

~~~
pandapanda
He got rich before having any children.

~~~
nsxwolf
And he still does a lot of work now.

------
eevilspock
children also counteract the narcissism and lack of perspective that plagues
the get-rich-quick any way you can startup world.

------
kjs3
Even if some dudebro can't understand how positive having a kid is for your
life, they do understand when I tell them about coming home, looking at your
child, and saying to yourself "I can not fail, that is why, and I will do
everything in my power not to". Having something to motivate you that way is
universal.

