Each individual has to consider their choices, their reason(s) for their choices, and any likely (or realized) consequences for their choices ... in order to make their best informed decision.
Good for you to think it through
for you.
I only carried steel J's for many years before finally thinking to try an Airweight. It was when the 642-1 was first rated for a steady diet of +P that I finally tried my first Airweight. It involved a little bit of a learning curve, meaning the first couple of cases of +P loads used. The standard pressure loads made it easier, but I was carrying +P so I decided to include more +P for quals and frequent range use.
I also had the opportunity to grab an early production 640 from the training safe (the older one chambered in .38SPL but laser marked as approved for use with +P+ on the frame window) and run some cases of some older 110gr +P+ duty ammo we'd inherited from another agency. That made shooting even +P in the 642-1 seem comparatively pleasant.
Once I was hooked on the lighter pocket holster carry weight of the Airweight (compared to a 36 and 649 .38SPL), I was
hooked.
I presently own a pair of 642-1's, a pair of M&P 340's (with and w/o ILS) and one of those 37-2DAO's that were released on the commercial amrket from a canceled overseas order (made on the older short Airweight frame using older machined carbon steel parts). All of them run within 13.8oz-15oz on a scale, empty.
I only run standard pressure loads in the 37-2, but have usually run one or another of my regular +P loads in the others. I have, however, started to also use that nifty Hornady 110gr standard pressure CD load using their FTX JHP in one of my 642 or M&P 340's now and again. It has a rather mild recoil and it's shown itself to be a tack-driver in
my snubs, in
my hands. It's a nice alternative to the heavy recoil of my usual +P's, and the even harsher recoil of the .357MAG loads I've previously run in my 340's.
Using my typical range of +P's in my 642's has usually meant the trigger guard has beaten up the distal knuckle of my trigger finger after as little as 50 rounds, and 100-150 rounds of +P during a single range session is about the point where further rounds are going to start degrading my shooting sessions.
And this is being said by someone who used to think that 400-500 rounds of stoutly loaded .357 or .44MAG loads made for a pleasant and enjoyable afternoon, using heavy steel revolvers.
The years of continually working with managing that sort of heavier recoil effect eventually takes its toll, though. Hands, wrists, elbows and shoulders can eventually express their displeasure and start to complain about it.
I remember during my DAO/revolver armorer class for S&W J-frames, listening to a younger, large and strapping young man from another agency enthusiastically tell everyone how he'd fired more than 500 full-power Magnum rounds through his 340PD, and how he planned to exclusively shoot Magnum ammo through a M&P 340 he was going to order. I didn't voice it, but my unspoken reaction was pretty much, "More power to you, dude. Enjoy subjecting yourself to that brutal recoil shooting magnum loads through that 11.8oz pocket mule while you're young and consider it an enjoyable challenge."
Age brings wear & tear to us all, no matter our strength of will and desire.
Personally, age, experience and time in service has resulted in me looking increasingly more toward the critical influences of being able to produce accuracy and effective "placement" of hits, than only relying on some of the "more effective" short barrel loads.
Don't mistake my meaning, as the modern better JHP's that can offer some hope for expansion from short tubes, albeit seemingly realistically more on the shorter testing for penetration range (10-11") are great options, especially for secondary and off-duty roles. It's just that I no longer see "penetration" of just under the FBI's minimum 12" requirement
for duty calibers to necessarily affect my own choice of suitable retirement loads for my needs.
Also, when it comes to the average person shooting a lightweight snub for defensive purpose, there's still something to be said for them to be able to make controllable and accurate hits, as a sufficiently rapid pace (if need be), even using some mild recoiling load like a 148gr target wadcutter. A nice flat, wide-for-caliber meplat, with a "edge", and a long bullet shape that might yaw and present a long surface traveling through an anatomical medium, might still be something of merit.
A 158gr RNL, or a 130gr RN Ball? Probably not so much. A LSWC that doesn't significantly deform or expand? Possible better than the RNL or the 130gr ball load.
Kinda might depend on whether it involves a CNS hit, though, too.
Still gotta be able to put the hits where they're going to be the most effective. That may not mean a +P for many average folks.
Some knowledge and considered thought into such things might help provide the basis for someone's individual informed choice.
Me? Well, I've been wearing a belt gun for the last couple of days (a 9 and then a .45), but tonight I'm going to pocket (holster) one of my J's that might be loaded with Speer GDHP 135gr +P, or one that might be loaded with the Hornady 110gr CD/FTX at standard pressure. I'll decide when I reach into the safe. It just means I'll probably grab a speedstrip of matching ammo to pocket, unless another speedstrip of the other load may be closer at hand.