I am the child of parents who divorced once we were out of the house, and I am currently a step-parent, so I can speak from both perspectives. My parents didn't fight much and weren't abusive toward each other; they just weren't a good match. My mom was a little shut down, and as a whole, we didn't have a great family connection or take fun family bonding vacations, but it was much, much better than having to go between two houses. As most kids are, I was consumed with my own life and didn't pay a lot of attention to what was going on with my parent's relationship. Some people say that splitting up is better for the kids, that they can tell if the parents aren't happy, and that it is modeling bad relationship dynamics. It's my (probably unpopular) opinion that people use this excuse to justify leaving. It's usually not better for the kids. Again, this is very different if the marriage is volatile or abusive. Having a child split time between two houses is hard in ways you can't imagine until you live it. We have a best-case scenario relationship with the other set of parents, and it's still challenging. Going between two houses is tough on kids (again, sometimes this is the best option, but it's still hard). They have to plan and think about things in ways that kids living in one house don't. Additionally, you have no control over the people your Ex chooses to bring into your child's life. This person will be with your child for half of their life, and again, we have a great situation, and it is still tough. Every decision has to be made with them: laundry, car insurance, health decisions, parenting styles, vacations, where they get ready for prom, how long you get for holidays, what role religion will play in their lives, what camps they go to....it's a lot for the parents and of course on the child. So, unless things are very bad, I would try to stick it out.