All the people I know who've divorced (one married 3 times) didn't lose a dime and a couple of those divorces were due to cheating (child out of wedlock too).
Do you mean the cost to file? If someone wants out because of cheating I'm assuming the cost would be worth it. Maybe I'm simplifying because it's not part of my reality....luckily.
@Mai Tai I get that. But still I don't see why a quick and dirty divorce can't free you from someone who broke that commitment IF that's what you chose to do. Why does it have to be more complicated than that? Like I mentioned the people that I know who've divorced made it seem so simple to me.
ETA: Yes I catch it. I say that because I've seen a marriage that was so lax but the same person had a solid non-marriage relationship and is now divorcing. From a legal standpoint people would most likely encourage the marriage but from what I saw, that gf was a better match and the proof is the divorce. The non-marriage relationship lasted much longer too.
So for me, just because someone is married, doesn't mean the relationship deserves to be salvaged. I'm not sure I'm explaining my thought well.
I re-read your response and my focus on the no asset, no kids or pets was not about the legal obligation by no means, that would be silly. I meant that in divorce proceedings, when those things exist, it makes the divorce process longer, more expensive and more painful. That's all I meant by that. So if those things don't exist and I'm cheated on AND I want out... It ain't nothing but gathering my papers and sending it. What am I missing?
Perhaps Barbie is right in saying that most married folks wouldn't leave their cheating spouse but wouldn't admit it. Either way, whatever makes someone happy
