I know people who have raised multiple kids beyond the point of them graduating from college and themselves starting their own families who are still in this industry (by choice), and are still sharp as ever.

I've also worked with people who are 25 years old and who have clearly given up on life or anything more than turning the crank and getting their biweekly ration of pellets. They live in fear of being discovered or "found out" and turned out on the street to sell the Mercury News on the onramp to 101.

Age, experience, rigor, knowledge, energy level, mindset. Don't confuse one for any of the others. It's a multi-dimensional problem. Also, it isn't static.

I can probably give you an example of a coworker at any position in that n-way space just from my own experiences, and that's only with a 25 year career. I can only imagine what else I'll encounter next.

That's weird. I find people with kids care more about personal and professional development, and are more diligent in their work.

This might have to do with the environment I'm in (7,5 hour days with almost no overtime; recruiting motivated people).

I also personally feel I've become more responsible in all areas of my life after having kids.

Edit: I'm mid thirties too. I find the least responsible people to be those in their 50s with no kids. But I've only met a few who remained developers; most either have kids or switched to management.

I’ve observed the same. Some of the most productive engineers are those with kids. Difference is they focus on getting their work done and doing it well (so they don’t get paged at night for instance) instead of chasing the new shiny, or being the hero.

At least one conclusion from this thread is that there are camps of people with different beliefs, and you're senior to one camp, but not another. A productive engineer, or not.

Even if you take this feedback to heart, you have a limited sample set of signals. Do you average them out, or do you only care about what one particular camp said (the camp that signs your check, perhaps)? Which camps get weighted more heavily?

I don't think there are any real trends to observe yet. The field is too volatile with its labeling to really take seriously any kind of prescribed career plan to seniority that lasts beyond 3-5 years. It's also why we repeatedly test people in interviews.

I think the reality right now is people go to the "camp" where they fit more comfortably. Older engineers with kids that want to work their 9-5, get work done and go home gravitate towards companies that are friendly to it.

Might you be mistaking seniority with 'tenure' or years of experience?

In my company simply staying around long enough doesn't make you a senior. You need to demonstrate that you are working at the next level to get promoted, and the guidelines for each level are well defined.

We also have a development plan program to coach low performers into either improving, or leaving the company, so the chances of someone getting promoted and then doing bad work is diminished.

Yes I do think I mistook seniority with tenure but mostly because that is the culture I work in.

Or perhaps I misunderstood my corporate culture. Either way, I'm only pointing out another side of the story. And thanks for phrasing it better for me. English is not my native tongue, even if it might seem so.

Competent people stop caring once they don't have anywhere to go, career-wise.

Incompetent people stop caring once they're sure they won't be found out.

Kids have nothing to do with it.

> Kids have nothing to do with it.

Kids do tend to consume time which may have otherwise been used for work or work-related personal development.

Time is finite, it's not just a binary matter of caring vs. not caring, it's also higher priorities displacing lower ones.

Kids change your life.

Whether they use up your energy or they force you to reevaluate and drop unimportant things to focus on what matters, depends on your individual experience.

For myself, having a child made me extremely career focused.

This may be also influenced by the selection criteria (or culture in other way). Basically, it's about those "who stay". The reasons to stay in a stagnating org could be diverse, but the attitude for change is often "lay low". Reasons to stay in "more with less" org are kind of a gamble, quite unsettling for anyone, let alone with kids.

In general, people would not care when they feel having no control over process and result. Just like when some other forces move them in whatever direction, like when riding downhill, why to spin the pedals?

On the other hand, I work with some developers in their late 40's and 50's who are just as sharp as those far younger, not afraid to use new technologies (if they are a suitable solution to a given problem) and be awesome mentors.

Assuming that anyone over the age of 45 is "deadwood" is actively harmful.

I'm not really sure it has something to do with having children. I would say it's much simpler: either you care, or you don't, whatever is your current age. I'm pretty sure those 'senior' architects we already that reckless back in their twenties.

I think this is actually a reasonable point from a certain perspective. I know personally since having kids, I work like half the time that I used to before, and I'm far more out of touch with the latest and greatest technologies. I nailed the hype train on functional languages and NoSQL databases in the early 2010's, but docker, k8s, and such, anything 2013 or later I'm clueless.

But I'll put the counterpoint on it. I've become a lot more focused on getting the job done in the limited time available rather than going off on tangents and integrating each new thing I think of into the project. I also am more careful in my work, because I don't have the time or energy to deal with mistakes after work hours. And I try to figure out the best use of my time to the company. I've mostly back-burnered the idea of creating the "next big thing" and that allows me to focus on doing the thing in front of me and maximizing my utility there.

So, boring, yeah, but I think career wise it's helped me figure out how to maximize my contribution.

That said, the two anecdotes you describe sound more like a Peter Principle in action. They probably did the same thing before kids too, is my guess.

Before I had kids I'd regularly work 12+ hour days. Afterwards I am much better at time management. This has nothing to do with caring about my work (which I do to a fault). It's about realizing that raw hours do not necessarily make an engineer more effective, and achieving big things is a marathon not a sprint.

Attributing the perceived lacking performance of people to having kids is just another way for ageism.

> I've had to teach senior architects not to send private ssh keys to each other and instead use public keys.

This has nothing to do with seniority, just ignorance. And ignorance knows no age.

> How to do basic naming schemes for servers.

Now this is something that I would understand why someone older would not care. You know why? Because these things are just fashions. You think they are stagnating? Truth is, they are probably just waiting until next week when some bright up-and-coming 30-something will show then another article they found online and will try to change ever-so-slightly something just so that they can feel they are making a difference. "Naming schemes for servers, really?"

I doubt it's stagnating, it's just they never were good to begin with. Personally I am not stagnating yet (mid 40s), but I have seen mediocre people getting promoted to architects and the only thing they can do are high level design presentations without any value.

They are most likely good speakers than have any technical skills.

It should be just the opposite. Now that I have more responsibility, I care more about staying marketable. I never want to be in the position where my livelihood is based on a job instead of having marketable skills and a strong network that will allow me to get a job quickly if I want/need to.