This raises the question, is it better to hire young unmarried developers with no kids if only to clear your conscience knowing that if things go badly you aren't putting an entire families well being in jeopardy.
See, there are plenty of us who can kick ass and raise a family at the same time. Not to mention plan and budget responsibly. In fact, you might really want to hire people who are good at that sort of thing, rather than the Red Bull-chugging, couch-sleeping, college codemonkey stereotype. But I suppose stereotyping is what got us here in the first place, and that's not fair to Red Bull aficionados.
I guess I'd just rather you let me and other prospective employees assess the risks for ourselves. That means frank discussion about clear, accurate information. But don't curtail things because of personal bias.
A 22-year-old hot-shot programmer brings to the table something very different than an experienced 45-year-old software developer who used to be a hot-shot programmer. The former can code circles around the latter, but the latter brings a perspective to the table which can save a lot of time, energy, and expense down the road.
I don't think I'd want a software team with an average age of 26, which looks down on or ignores the advice and feedback of more experienced programmers.
Our industry is developing in strange ways. I know a bunch of good programmers who are unable to find work because of their ages, and who then start their own businesses, and are successful there. Then, I suppose they get brought in to the people who might have otherwise hired them as "consultants!"
That sounds awfully ridiculous.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_i...
On the other hand, state and local laws may add additional restrictions beyond federal laws and as I've mentioned... I am not a lawyer. And I don't condone people being dicks.
EDIT: In California, the "magic number" of employees below which you can be an open bigot is apparently five. See:
http://ag.ca.gov/publications/civilrights/01CRhandbook/chapt...
* Marital status is a protected class. You can't consider it when hiring. * Age is a protected class. You can't consider it when hiring. * Pregnancy is a proxy for sex, a protected class. You can't consider it when hiring [1]. * Parental status is a protected class, but apparently is not applicable to Employment cases [2]. So you could get away with avoiding parents in some places. But man, what a great way to violate the No Asshole rule. Frankly, I'd rather not work for a startup that would want to go down this path.
[1] http://users.aristotle.net/~hantley/hiedlegl/statutes/title7... [2] http://www.seattle.gov/civilrights/discrimination.htm