LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

"And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on."

It's disappointing but I think both male and female hiring managers are wary about hiring women for this exact reason. I've heard about young women not wearing their engagement rings or wedding rings to interviews for fear that it could affect their selection; certain availability-based biases may come into play.

Personally I would hate if I missed out on career advancement because I decided I wanted to start a family or add to one.

And Bernadette got me thinking, all these women you go to work with encouraging you to start a family and giving advice could easily have ulterior motives......and by "you" I mean it universally.

We shouldn't think of each other this way, but the history of women in the workplace is not always one of loyalty and support, so we have to brace for backstabbing and sabotage.

I wouldn't put it past anyone. BTW, I think workplace competition can be healthy and breed productivity, But the sabotage happens among men and women.

Also, I think the common fear many women have of being discriminated against because of wearing the wedding or engagement ring to the interview is overstated. If that DOES happen, in the most miniscule of cases, it's probably more likely to affect salary negotiations than hiring .

I hire at my company and I've never paid attention to a female candidate's ring or lack thereof nor have I made a decision based on speculation about their family plans.

Getting back to Bernadette, Ruchi is an absolute moron for telling her co-workers friend what she did. Even in jest, that's something you keep to yourself.

Also, your post reminds me of that onion headline: "Woman overjoyed by giant uterine parasite".

@Gothish520 said:

LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

I'm with Goth on this 100%. Parents, mother's in particular, bugged the $hit out of me when I was managing businesses/projects.
I recall in PARENTHOOD, the film not the TV show, where Steve Martin is trying to become a partner in his firm. His boss looks at him and tells him why he's not getting the job... _ "You still don't get it, do you?? Phil just brought in 3 brand-new multi million dollar clients. He has spent the last month wining and dining these guys, doing whatever it takes. He doesn't tell me he's having problems with his kids - I'm not even sure if he HAS kids."_

I didn't mind supporting people with kids. To a point. But their life decisions and issues are THEIR'S, not mine. And this comes into play in other areas too. Because SOMEONE has to pick up all the unfinished work these people leave behind.

My wife and I made the conscious decision to not have kids. And right now, at my wife's firm, guess who gets shoved onto all the travel? Guess who has to stay late while the women (and men) who have kids are always leaving EARLY?? It's never been said, but it regularly happens, that my wife gets extra work dumped on her because "she's the one that doesn't have kids...". We don't have soccer games or dance recitals to go to. We don't have kids to pick up from school. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

People with kids have a tendency to think they should get some special treatment because of their kids. How do I know this? I've got a friend who USES his kids as an excuse to get out of a helluva lot of things at his office he doesn't want to do. And he readily admits to this. Then, like Steve Martin in the film, he gets pissed when he doesn't get the big promotion or raise. Complete and utter bull $#it.

Look - I would always tried to accommodate my employees needs. But it's a fact that for every single piece of work they don't get done, someone ELSE has to do it. And I for one always took notice of the people that, when it came time to work, worked. That's not penalizing the parents, that's rewarding the ones who show up and stay and work. That's called life. There's this absurd notion that 'you can have it all'. No, you really can't. Your choices impact your life. If you choose to prioritize a family - that comes with costs. It always has. And others should not be on the hook to pay those costs.

Rant over.

@censorshipsucks06 said:

@Gothish520 said:

LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

I'm with Goth on this 100%. Parents, mother's in particular, bugged the $hit out of me when I was managing businesses/projects.
I recall in PARENTHOOD, the film not the TV show, where Steve Martin is trying to become a partner in his firm. His boss looks at him and tells him why he's not getting the job... _ "You still don't get it, do you?? Phil just brought in 3 brand-new multi million dollar clients. He has spent the last month wining and dining these guys, doing whatever it takes. He doesn't tell me he's having problems with his kids - I'm not even sure if he HAS kids."_

I didn't mind supporting people with kids. To a point. But their life decisions and issues are THEIR'S, not mine. And this comes into play in other areas too. Because SOMEONE has to pick up all the unfinished work these people leave behind.

My wife and I made the conscious decision to not have kids. And right now, at my wife's firm, guess who gets shoved onto all the travel? Guess who has to stay late while the women (and men) who have kids are always leaving EARLY?? It's never been said, but it regularly happens, that my wife gets extra work dumped on her because "she's the one that doesn't have kids...". We don't have soccer games or dance recitals to go to. We don't have kids to pick up from school. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

People with kids have a tendency to think they should get some special treatment because of their kids. How do I know this? I've got a friend who USES his kids as an excuse to get out of a helluva lot of things at his office he doesn't want to do. And he readily admits to this. Then, like Steve Martin in the film, he gets pissed when he doesn't get the big promotion or raise. Complete and utter bull $#it.

Look - I would always tried to accommodate my employees needs. But it's a fact that for every single piece of work they don't get done, someone ELSE has to do it. And I for one always took notice of the people that, when it came time to work, worked. That's not penalizing the parents, that's rewarding the ones who show up and stay and work. That's called life. There's this absurd notion that 'you can have it all'. No, you really can't. Your choices impact your life. If you choose to prioritize a family - that comes with costs. It always has. And others should not be on the hook to pay those costs.

Rant over.

Wow, this makes me not want to have kids. Funny thing is, during the Holidays my uncles and aunts love to dump thier kids off on me so they can get a break from them. I love spending time with them but they're all very young and they start to view me as a parent and not a cousin.

It's not fair to me, I'd rather be hanging out with my older cousins who are my age LOL

@CalabrianQueen said:

@censorshipsucks06 said:

@Gothish520 said:

LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

I'm with Goth on this 100%. Parents, mother's in particular, bugged the $hit out of me when I was managing businesses/projects.
I recall in PARENTHOOD, the film not the TV show, where Steve Martin is trying to become a partner in his firm. His boss looks at him and tells him why he's not getting the job... _ "You still don't get it, do you?? Phil just brought in 3 brand-new multi million dollar clients. He has spent the last month wining and dining these guys, doing whatever it takes. He doesn't tell me he's having problems with his kids - I'm not even sure if he HAS kids."_

I didn't mind supporting people with kids. To a point. But their life decisions and issues are THEIR'S, not mine. And this comes into play in other areas too. Because SOMEONE has to pick up all the unfinished work these people leave behind.

My wife and I made the conscious decision to not have kids. And right now, at my wife's firm, guess who gets shoved onto all the travel? Guess who has to stay late while the women (and men) who have kids are always leaving EARLY?? It's never been said, but it regularly happens, that my wife gets extra work dumped on her because "she's the one that doesn't have kids...". We don't have soccer games or dance recitals to go to. We don't have kids to pick up from school. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

People with kids have a tendency to think they should get some special treatment because of their kids. How do I know this? I've got a friend who USES his kids as an excuse to get out of a helluva lot of things at his office he doesn't want to do. And he readily admits to this. Then, like Steve Martin in the film, he gets pissed when he doesn't get the big promotion or raise. Complete and utter bull $#it.

Look - I would always tried to accommodate my employees needs. But it's a fact that for every single piece of work they don't get done, someone ELSE has to do it. And I for one always took notice of the people that, when it came time to work, worked. That's not penalizing the parents, that's rewarding the ones who show up and stay and work. That's called life. There's this absurd notion that 'you can have it all'. No, you really can't. Your choices impact your life. If you choose to prioritize a family - that comes with costs. It always has. And others should not be on the hook to pay those costs.

Rant over.

Wow, this makes me not want to have kids. Funny thing is, during the Holidays my uncles and aunts love to dump thier kids off on me so they can get a break from them. I love spending time with them but they're all very young and they start to view me as a parent and not a cousin.

It's not fair to me, I'd rather be hanging out with my older cousins who are my age LOL

Having kids is fine. Accommodating them as an employer is fine. What I don't like is the fact these parents feel other employees are obligated to pick up the slack for them, and that rewarding those who pick up that slack and hence do more work is somehow 'discriminatory'.

Again - if you do less work, and put in less time, it's a special kind of entitlement to believe you deserve as much compensation and opportunity as those that put in more time and do more work. It kind of flies in the face of the term 'equality'.

@censorshipsucks06 said:

@CalabrianQueen said:

@censorshipsucks06 said:

@Gothish520 said:

LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

I'm with Goth on this 100%. Parents, mother's in particular, bugged the $hit out of me when I was managing businesses/projects.
I recall in PARENTHOOD, the film not the TV show, where Steve Martin is trying to become a partner in his firm. His boss looks at him and tells him why he's not getting the job... _ "You still don't get it, do you?? Phil just brought in 3 brand-new multi million dollar clients. He has spent the last month wining and dining these guys, doing whatever it takes. He doesn't tell me he's having problems with his kids - I'm not even sure if he HAS kids."_

I didn't mind supporting people with kids. To a point. But their life decisions and issues are THEIR'S, not mine. And this comes into play in other areas too. Because SOMEONE has to pick up all the unfinished work these people leave behind.

My wife and I made the conscious decision to not have kids. And right now, at my wife's firm, guess who gets shoved onto all the travel? Guess who has to stay late while the women (and men) who have kids are always leaving EARLY?? It's never been said, but it regularly happens, that my wife gets extra work dumped on her because "she's the one that doesn't have kids...". We don't have soccer games or dance recitals to go to. We don't have kids to pick up from school. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

People with kids have a tendency to think they should get some special treatment because of their kids. How do I know this? I've got a friend who USES his kids as an excuse to get out of a helluva lot of things at his office he doesn't want to do. And he readily admits to this. Then, like Steve Martin in the film, he gets pissed when he doesn't get the big promotion or raise. Complete and utter bull $#it.

Look - I would always tried to accommodate my employees needs. But it's a fact that for every single piece of work they don't get done, someone ELSE has to do it. And I for one always took notice of the people that, when it came time to work, worked. That's not penalizing the parents, that's rewarding the ones who show up and stay and work. That's called life. There's this absurd notion that 'you can have it all'. No, you really can't. Your choices impact your life. If you choose to prioritize a family - that comes with costs. It always has. And others should not be on the hook to pay those costs.

Rant over.

Wow, this makes me not want to have kids. Funny thing is, during the Holidays my uncles and aunts love to dump thier kids off on me so they can get a break from them. I love spending time with them but they're all very young and they start to view me as a parent and not a cousin.

It's not fair to me, I'd rather be hanging out with my older cousins who are my age LOL

Having kids is fine. Accommodating them as an employer is fine. What I don't like is the fact these parents feel other employees are obligated to pick up the slack for them, and that rewarding those who pick up that slack and hence do more work is somehow 'discriminatory'.

Again - if you do less work, and put in less time, it's a special kind of entitlement to believe you deserve as much compensation and opportunity as those that put in more time and do more work. It kind of flies in the face of the term 'equality'.

That's exactly why having kids puts you between a rock and a hard place. You won't have as much time to commit to your work unless one of you is a stay at home parent or you have full-time childcare.

Most of the women in my family had a child before thier 23rd birthday either by accident or purposely to have one early.

@censorshipsucks06 said:

@Gothish520 said:

LMAO!

It's very hard for me to be objective about this subject, because I've never wanted kids. Also, speaking as someone who participated in the hiring process and made employee schedules, many workers with children were a pain in the ass. It's mean and probably discriminatory, but there it is. It's always something with them - can't get a babysitter, kid is sick, has sports or school plays, blah blah blah. I absolutely believe that your job or career should not encompass your life, but from an employer perspective, it's just another reason for employees to call out or leave early, sometimes constantly. Very bad for productivity and not fair to co-workers. But that's life.

I once interviewed a young woman in her early 20's for a sales/merchandising position. She gave a good interview and we were in "hire on the spot" mode, so at the end of the interview I told her she had the job. Only then did she tell me she was pregnant! Nothing I could do without risking a discrimination charge, so I had to move forward. And of course she called out, left early, stood around doing almost nothing, went on maternity leave a couple of months later and never came back, despite insisting that she would every time we called to find out what was going on.

As an employee, I don't feel that Ruchi did anything wrong. Someone has to handle Bernadette's workload while she's gone. It's a fact that many women in the US who go on maternity leave stall their career trajectory, if not set it back. Not sure how that can be mitigated - if you aren't there to do your job, regardless of the reason, what's an employer to do? Put their business on hold until you decide to come back? Work from home can be an option for some, but if everyone could do their jobs from home, then we wouldn't need offsite workplaces, would we?

I'm with Goth on this 100%. Parents, mother's in particular, bugged the $hit out of me when I was managing businesses/projects.
I recall in PARENTHOOD, the film not the TV show, where Steve Martin is trying to become a partner in his firm. His boss looks at him and tells him why he's not getting the job... _ "You still don't get it, do you?? Phil just brought in 3 brand-new multi million dollar clients. He has spent the last month wining and dining these guys, doing whatever it takes. He doesn't tell me he's having problems with his kids - I'm not even sure if he HAS kids."_

I didn't mind supporting people with kids. To a point. But their life decisions and issues are THEIR'S, not mine. And this comes into play in other areas too. Because SOMEONE has to pick up all the unfinished work these people leave behind.

My wife and I made the conscious decision to not have kids. And right now, at my wife's firm, guess who gets shoved onto all the travel? Guess who has to stay late while the women (and men) who have kids are always leaving EARLY?? It's never been said, but it regularly happens, that my wife gets extra work dumped on her because "she's the one that doesn't have kids...". We don't have soccer games or dance recitals to go to. We don't have kids to pick up from school. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

People with kids have a tendency to think they should get some special treatment because of their kids. How do I know this? I've got a friend who USES his kids as an excuse to get out of a helluva lot of things at his office he doesn't want to do. And he readily admits to this. Then, like Steve Martin in the film, he gets pissed when he doesn't get the big promotion or raise. Complete and utter bull $#it.

*Look - I would always tried to accommodate my employees needs. But it's a fact that for every single piece of work they don't get done, someone ELSE has to do it. And I for one always took notice of the people that, when it came time to work, worked. That's not penalizing the parents, that's rewarding the ones who show up and stay and work. That's called life. There's this absurd notion that 'you can have it all'. No, you really can't. Your choices impact your life. If you choose to prioritize a family - that comes with costs. It always has. And others should not be on the hook to pay those costs. *

Rant over.

Preach!

Especially the part about having it all. When women entered the workforce full throttle, they were led to believe, or WANTED to believe, that they could do it all - work full time, raise a family, keep the house spotless, keep their marriage strong, etc etc etc - who could forget the old Enjolie cologne commercial about how the woman could "bring home the bacon, fry it up in a pan, and never let you forget you're a man!"

I'm exhausted just thinking about it.

@CalabrianQueen said: That's exactly why having kids puts you between a rock and a hard place. You won't have as much time to commit to your work unless one of you is a stay at home parent or you have full-time childcare.

Most of the women in my family had a child before thier 23rd birthday either by accident or purposely to have one early.

My Mom had four children by the time she was 28. Holy crap on a cracker. But she never worked until my youngest sister started going to school , and even then she worked as a lunch aide at her school and was always home for us, until the youngest entered middle school. Then she got a job as a waitress at a breakfast joint, so she was still home by mid-afternoon, plus she had me and my middle sister to help out.

The world's a different place now, of course, but expecting everyone to accomodate one's choice to have kids is selfish. Be it at the workplace, or expecting babysitting on demand (and yes, that includes grandparents - they already raised their kids), or trying to stop the little dickens from tearing up a store, or having to listen while the little angel screams uncontrollably at a restaurant...well, you get the idea. Your choice, you handle it.

It really would be wise to be more understanding and accommodating of children. Since those children will be paying for your and other people's retirement, producing the products you want and need, etc. Heck, even running the government someday. And those will all happen long before you're in the ground or whatever and past caring.

@Gothish520 said:

@CalabrianQueen said: That's exactly why having kids puts you between a rock and a hard place. You won't have as much time to commit to your work unless one of you is a stay at home parent or you have full-time childcare.

Most of the women in my family had a child before thier 23rd birthday either by accident or purposely to have one early.

My Mom had four children by the time she was 28. Holy crap on a cracker. But she never worked until my youngest sister started going to school , and even then she worked as a lunch aide at her school and was always home for us, until the youngest entered middle school. Then she got a job as a waitress at a breakfast joint, so she was still home by mid-afternoon, plus she had me and my middle sister to help out.

The world's a different place now, of course, but expecting everyone to accomodate one's choice to have kids is selfish. Be it at the workplace, or expecting babysitting on demand (and yes, that includes grandparents - they already raised their kids), or trying to stop the little dickens from tearing up a store, or having to listen while the little angel screams uncontrollably at a restaurant...well, you get the idea. Your choice, you handle it.

AMEN!!!!

Bad behavior is bad behavior, of course. But if all you think about is the "numbers game" at work, where there's X amount of work for Y number of people, and if some of Y don't do their share then the others have to do more; there's another "numbers game" that you seem to have overlooked and it works the same way:

Just to maintain a stable population - the same number as now, without increasing - means that all women must have an average of 2.2 children. And so women who don't have their share of 2.2 children each, no matter what the reason, are increasing the workload for other women, to keep society going on an even keel.

Those people are raising the people who will be your future doctors and such - long after the doctors the same age as you, are out of the business - and so is it really too much to offer some appreciation for those who are doing THAT job which you didn't want?

@ArcticFox12 said:

@Knixon said:

Bad behavior is bad behavior, of course. But if all you think about is the "numbers game" at work, where there's X amount of work for Y number of people, and if some of Y don't do their share then the others have to do more; there's another "numbers game" that you seem to have overlooked and it works the same way:

Just to maintain a stable population - the same number as now, without increasing - means that all women must have an average of 2.2 children. And so women who don't have their share of 2.2 children each, no matter what the reason, are increasing the workload for other women, to keep society going on an even keel.

Those people are raising the people who will be your future doctors and such - long after the doctors the same age as you, are out of the business - and so is it really too much to offer some appreciation for those who are doing THAT job which you didn't want?

I don't think you're accounting for mortality or the occasional mass murder , natural disaster or outbreak of disease that wipes out large numbers of people. If you account for those variables( and why wouldn't you?) I highly doubt every women needs to contribute 2 kids to stabilize population.

Population is never "stable" , and how the hell would one measure something as erratic as population stability anyway?

Also the planet is not experiencing a shortage of new people, it's beset by OVERPOPULATION , China being a prime example.

Part of Darwin's theory is that resources are FINITE and populations growing unchecked can and will deplete resources.

2.2 children is the average, already taking into account early mortality, etc. At least in the developed world. In some countries it's still considered the norm to have 5 or 6 children, or even more, because several of them might die before reaching adulthood.

If you're thinking the number should be/must be closer to 1, just remember that each woman has to replace not only herself, but a man too. 2.2 child per woman is the average to maintain the SAME population, NOT "unchecked growth." (Although arguments about "finite resources" and "peak oil" etc are largely invalid for other reasons. Malthus was wrong about that in the late 18th/early 19th centuries, and people who make those arguments now are still wrong, mostly for the same reasons.)

As for the rest of it, as with China - where they already have a pretty serious demographic problem because the 1-child policy resulted in an oversupply of men and not enough women - the problem worldwide is really not that there's too many people in total, or that AMERICANS - or Europeans in developed parts of the world, for that matter - are having too many children. Indeed, most of Europe - the parts Americans think of most as European, anyway - is having a COLLAPSE of population. The larger problem is that countries that already can't feed and otherwise support themselves - often/usually because of socialist/communist governments - keep growing.

This interview still contains the best ideas on the subject that I've encountered so far:

https://www.adrive.com/public/DS9Nut/NARN%2012-02-06%20NARN%201%20Hour%202%20Mark%20Steyn.mp3