I would bet it's because lots of people can't afford divorces right now. It's not always a cheap and simple procedure.

Could also be that marriages have gone down over the years.

@Skankingmike: It could be a variety of reasons. I wonder about the strength of the correlation.

a) People in single-income marriages probably don't like the thought of going it alone right now.

b) Divorces can be very expensive.

c) People are stressed enough already.

and more and more...

Great. Just one more thing I can't afford to do.

This doesn't mean it's helping marriages. It's not like the would-be-divorced couples like each other any more than they would if they could afford a divorce.

Even without a national/global financial crisis, I've had bosses who wanted to divorce but couldn't afford it.

I know two women personally who are permanently separated from their husbands, but won't get a legal divorce because the marriage is financially beneficial to their situations. It's kind of sad. :(

In my personal sphere there are more divorces than ever, but they don't seem related to money.

The hospital we gave birth at told us they were mid-baby-boom, coinciding with nine months after the financial crisis began. Sex is cheap entertainment!

Just got a divorce, it wasn't that expensive (besides what my x-wife took). The main reason it wasn't to costly for me was because I opted to not get a lawyer (we didn't have kids) even though she did.

Everybody told me I was crazy not to get a lawyer, but in the end I think I came out better than expected.

Yeah...I also think people just can't afford to divorce. Lawyers are expensive.

@Skankingmike: While a divorce can be expensive, it's still a (mostly) one-time expense. The cost of maintaining two households is probably a much bigger deterrent. People are losing their homes- how are they supposed to support two?

Also, in uncertain times, people may take more comfort than before in the stability of marriage, and feel it's worth putting more effort into it.

Although I tend to agree that it has to do with the cost of divorce, it is possible that working through a difficult financial situation, going back to the basics, spending more time at home, etc, all could potentially bring a couple together. They seem more likely to drive a couple apart, of course, but people tend to change quickly with their finances.

Alternately, I think recent studies have shown that having kids does not improve the happiness of married couples . . .

"He also says people whose retirement savings have dwindled since last year are rethinking whether divorce is affordable."

What he means is that one spouse considers if the retirement fund of the other spouse is worth getting.

Five years ago, my credit card debt worshipping ex-wife with no retirement funds what-so-ever (college educated woman who lived the multi-level marketing lifestyle) got two of my accounts in our divorce. She actually made out since there was a delay in transfering the funds to her and the funds increased about 25% over the time of the delay. Most likely she immediately cashed the funds out to pay some of her usual debt...

@crabbygeek: The issues are much less complex without children. It turns into a business deal versus a scheduling and money nightmare...

But some higher wealth folks are divorcing now because there is less to hand over. They'll have to pay out less now than a couple of years ago.

Marriage and divorce are both expensive endeavors

@JennQPublic: well I know many people that put off divorces due to costs. I think the bigger problem is many people don't realize that you don't always need a lawyer for a divorce.

I know one married couple who want to be divorced but can't afford. They still live together - he's upstairs and she's downstairs. It is particular frustrating for the wife, because she is working, but the husband refuses to find a job, and thanks to their past financial issues neither one of them has good credit. Unless he decides to get off his arse and move in with someone else, they're stuck with each other. Sad.

Absolutely. In fact, one of my coworkers is still living with her (estranged) husband because neither can afford to keep their house with only one income -- and they can't sell it for as much as they owe.

@dham: That may have been a tongue-in-cheek comment. It's pretty common (at least in my circles) to hear people joking that the dysfunctional couple is having a baby to fix all their problems.

@sarahq: I know of a similar story...in this case, though, my aunt's husband left her for his high school sweetheart. She got the house but can barely scrape by, while he was living the high life with his bachelor pad and rich girlfriend.

Then he lost his job a few months ago. Karma's a bitch, huh? :-D

Shenanigans. I had the financial crisis and the baby, plus I was the breadwinner, and my ex wife still walked because she was immature and couldn't handle being in a partnership/marriage. So yeah, that worked out well for me.

/actually it did. I got laid off in March and I'm moving 800 miles away to be with an ex girlfriend and get my life back on track (I have a job up there as of this morning, too!). I have custody of my son and he's coming with me. With my ex's blessing.

@Snakeophelia: Sounds like me and my ex-boyfriend (together 12 years but never married). Thank God we never married. The deadbeat hasn't made any effort to find work in 3 years. He's going to get off his arse because he knows that he has five more weeks before I yank the rug out from under it.

@darkrose: All the best to you and your baby and your lady, who is inhumanly magnanimous to let you back into her life with another woman's baby. With what's going on in my life right now, it's really good to hear of someone getting a second chance. No snark. :)

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): There's a story that may even be true. New York had a major blackout in 1965. No electricity at all. Nine months after the blackout there was a blip in births. I guess nothing was on tv.

@dham: Yes that happens, but then after things improve again or after enough time passes the marriage returns to the way it was if the couple does nothing to address the other problems.

@italianscallion33: But at least the couple is together. They have a chance to make their marriage better if they are still married!

As a Christian and a child of a broken family, I think that marriage should be until death parts you (except perhaps in extreme cases of abuse). I mean, that's what you promise when you get married, right? It's a solemn vow and all that? People sometimes tell me they're better off (both kids and adults), but I don't buy it. I can attest to how painful it is to all members involved. I still bear the scars personally.

I've also been married for eight years, and understand how hard it can be. But after that long, I'm married to a girl who's my best friend, is hot, and actually likes to be my roommate. Can't beat that :)

Sorry for the digression. If anything good comes out of this financial crisis thing, I hope it's BETTER marriages, not just ones that stay together because it's inconvenient to divorce!

I'm pretty sure these stats are inflated. This info originated from an Indianapolis local TV news site, and only provided anecdotal sources ("most divorce lawyers say..."). The online article said "divorce filings are down as much as 50%", but the corresponding video said "...down more than 40%". When I looked around online for a few minutes, I couldn't find any national divorce stats less than 5 years old.

I suspect that a major factor is the combination of unemployment and health insurance. One case that I'm intimately familiar with: a couple (A & B) who are living together,even though each is still married to somebody else (A & X, B & Y). Relationships are all amicable, and everyone involved would prefer it if both failed marriages could be divorced so that this couple to get married.

However X is self-employed, and gets medical coverage as A's spouse, while B is unemployed, and gets coverage through Y. If both existing couples divorce, X and B both wind up without medical insurance. If A and B then get married, X is still left without coverage, while even though B can get coverage via A, they have to go through the whole "pre-existing condition" stuff.

Oh yes: between them A and X could actually afford to buy insurance for X, except that they are helping their adult children financially!

Welcome to America. Single-payer health coverage can't come too soon for me.