Is marriage less worthy of saving if no children are involved?
I often see questions here that receive answers stating that, if there are no children involved, they should go ahead and divorce. Why is a marriage without children less inherently worthy of saving than a marriage with children? I would futher assert that if you have no children, the possibility of saving the marriage could be better, because childless couples have less stress on their money and on their time. But what do you think? Would you advise a childless couple to throw in the towel more quickly than you would advise divorce for a couple who have one or more children?
Hey, you either took the marriage vows or you didn’t!
If you promise to stay together with someone for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do you apart, that is supposed to mean something.
Whether or not you have children doesn’t alter what you promised your spouse at the altar.