The Economics of Dating and Marriage

Two speed-dating studies asked participants to fill out over 100 questionnaires about their preferences in a partner before any meetings took place. These questionnaires could only reveal how likely someone is to like others in general, and how popular they tend to be — they couldn’t predict whether two specific people would hit it off. Compatibility can only be determined by meeting in person. Therefore, it’s far more worthwhile to get to know multiple people than to bet everything on just one.

Cost

No cost at all. Spend time getting to know several people instead of obsessing over just one. The hard part is resisting the urge to fixate on a single person.

Benefit

In both speed-dating studies, participants completed more than 100 self-report questionnaires related to partner preferences prior to meeting potential matches. Researchers then applied a random forest model — an algorithm designed to detect patterns — to analyze the data. This model could predict “how likely an individual is to like others overall,” with the questionnaires accounting for 4%–18% of the variance in such tendencies; this represents only a small fraction of the total differences between individuals. It could also predict “how popular an individual tends to be,” explaining 7%–27% of variance. However, it completely failed to predict whether two specific individuals would be compatible; no combination of pre-meeting traits or preferences could be used to forecast their mutual attraction. Earlier, the same research team conducted another speed-dating experiment where participants reported their own ideal preferences — whether they valued physical appearance or financial prospects more. Even this information couldn’t predict how interested they’d be in a particular person during the actual date.

Note

Both studies clearly state that compatibility cannot be predicted before meeting someone — they do not claim that all efforts to predict it are futile. Since true compatibility can only be determined by face-to-face interaction, it makes far more sense to invest time in meeting multiple people individually rather than placing all hopes on just one. Keep in mind that all study participants were university students from Western countries; China’s dating environment differs significantly, so these findings should be applied with some caution.

If someone has clearly refused you, and you still send messages or wait for them, as of January 2026 this constitutes a violation of public order laws. Offenders may be detained for up to 5 days or fined up to 1000 yuan. For more serious cases, detention ranges from 5 to 10 days. Police can also issue orders barring the offender from contacting the other person; any violation of such orders results in an additional 5–10 days of detention.

Cost

No cost at all, neither financial nor time-related. The hard part is self-restraint: refraining from sending further messages or waiting around for the other person.

Benefit

The Public Security Administration Punishment Law, effective 1 January 2026, explicitly lists persistent pursuit and stalking as separate violations. The relevant clause states that “repeatedly sending obscene, insulting, threatening or similar messages, or using harassment, stalking and other methods to interfere with another person’s normal life” is punishable by up to 5 days of detention or a fine of up to 1000 yuan. For more serious cases, the penalty is 5–10 days of detention, with a possible fine up to 1000 yuan. This law also adds an extra provision: with approval from a senior police official, offenders can be ordered to refrain from contacting the victim for a set period; any violation of this order incurs an additional 5–10 days of detention.

Note

There is no research evidence supporting the claim that “persistent pursuit can win over the other person”; however, detention and contact bans are explicitly stipulated by law. These records also affect eligibility for civil service exams, background checks, and certain professional licenses. The line between pursuing someone and harassing them is not defined by the perpetrator’s intentions, but by whether the other person has clearly expressed refusal.

In one study, 52 pairs of strangers of opposite genders chatted for about 10 minutes, then tried to determine whether each other was flirting. The results showed they were fairly accurate at spotting when no flirting was occurring, but struggled to identify actual flirting. A second experiment using video evaluations reached the same conclusion. Therefore, rather than guessing based on expressions or tone, pay attention to actions: who initiates contact, who schedules future meetings, and whether they follow up when you don’t make the first move.

Cost

This requires no money or much time. The real challenge is breaking old habits: stop trying to interpret facial expressions and tone, and instead record observable behaviors.

Benefit

Two studies examined how accurately people can recognize flirting. The first involved 52 unrelated male-female pairs conversing for 10–12 minutes; afterward, each participant reported whether they themselves were flirting and whether they believed their partner was. The results indicated that interactions without any flirting were identified more reliably, while those involving actual flirting were harder to detect. The second study used 26 one-minute video clips and 261 observers, yielding similar findings. In short, people can fairly reliably tell when someone is not flirting, but they struggle to detect when flirting is happening.

Note

This topic remains debated. Some research suggests the issue isn’t that men overestimate women’s sexual intentions, but that women tend to underreport their own intentions on surveys. There is still no consensus on which group judges more accurately. Nevertheless, both viewpoints agree on one point: relying on subtle cues such as facial expressions or tone to infer someone’s thoughts yields poor results. Observable behaviors — such as who initiates contact, plans future meetings, and follows up without prompting — are far more reliable indicators.

The best indicator of a healthy relationship is your own feelings toward it, not your partner’s qualifications. For instance, whether you perceive your partner as attentive and appreciative of you, or how often you argue. Your personal feelings carry two to four times more weight than what your partner says about the relationship. However, no questionnaire can reliably predict whether the relationship will improve or deteriorate over time.

Cost

There is no monetary cost, nor does it require much time. The real challenge lies in shifting your perspective: put aside your checklist of ideal partner traits and instead focus on how you interact with each other.

Benefit

A machine learning analysis of data from 29 laboratories and 43 longitudinal paired datasets — meaning data collected from the same couples over time — found that the strongest predictors of relationship quality all stem from each partner’s own perceptions of the relationship: their sense of their partner’s commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, and contentment; as well as the frequency of conflicts. Among individual-level factors, life satisfaction, negative emotions, depression, and attachment styles (both avoidant and anxious) also play a role. At the start of these studies, these relationship-related factors could explain up to 45% of the variation in relationship quality between different couples; by the end of the studies, this figure dropped to 18%. Crucially, the predictive power of self-reported relationship perceptions is two to four times greater than that of perceptions reported by partners. Adding individual differences and partner-reported data to self-reported perceptions yields no additional predictive value.

Note

This same research also found that no set of self-reported questionnaire items can reliably forecast whether a relationship will improve or worsen during the study period. Therefore, while gauging your own feelings about the relationship is far more accurate than cross-checking your partner against a checklist of ideal traits, it still cannot predict the relationship’s future trajectory. For a deeper look at how relationship quality ties to physical health, see Section 17 of this chapter, which frames relationship health as a component of overall well-being.

Pair two strangers up and have them take turns answering 36 questions grouped into three levels of depth. After 45 minutes, their sense of closeness is noticeably higher than in a control group that simply chatted for the same amount of time. What drives this effect is the act of taking turns to share honest thoughts at increasing levels of depth, not any pre-planned conversational script. Keep in mind this measure only captures short-term closeness, and does not guarantee the development of a long-term relationship.

Cost

No cost involved. It takes 45 minutes to complete.

Benefit

This method pairs two unfamiliar people to answer 36 questions in total, arranged in three tiers of increasing depth. The questions range from “Who is the person you’d most like to invite for dinner?” to “When was the last time you cried in front of someone?” After 45 minutes, the participants report a higher sense of closeness compared to those who only chatted for the same duration. Their reported closeness also exceeds the average rating college students give to their closest real-life relationships.

Note

Only one experiment has been conducted so far, with college students as participants. It measures short-term closeness only, not whether a lasting relationship can form. The core mechanism at work here is that closeness grows when two people take turns sharing genuine personal details at progressively deeper levels — rather than relying on scripts, tricks or one-sided efforts. The key takeaway for practical use is to “share something honest about yourself, then ask a similarly personal question back”, and make sure both parties get a turn to do so.

Long-distance relationships actually tend to be more stable while the couple remains apart, since seeing each other infrequently allows each person to idealize the other. The real difficulty emerges only after they move in together. Data shows that roughly half of long-distance couples eventually transition to living locally, while the other half end their relationship while still apart. Among those who reunite, one-third break up within three months of moving together.

Cost

There are travel expenses to consider, plus the time spent traveling back and forth. Couples see each other far less often than those living in the same city, making it difficult to maintain the relationship over the long term without regular contact.

Benefit

Two separate studies reach the same conclusion: long-distance relationships are generally more stable than local ones while the couple remains separated. This stability stems from a significantly higher degree of idealization — meaning each partner tends to view the other more favorably than reality warrants. The studies measured factors such as idealized distortion, romantic love, relationship memories, and perceived similarity. Moreover, the less frequently couples meet, the more positively they tend to view each other. However, this stability holds only while they remain apart; once they live in the same city, long-distance couples are far more likely to split up. One longitudinal study found that about half of long-distance couples eventually moved in together, while the other half ended their relationship while still apart. Of those who reunited, one-third broke up within three months of living together. The longer the intervals between visits while apart, and the greater the degree of idealization, the less stable the relationship tends to be after reuniting.

Note

These findings are based on romantic relationships among American university students, excluding married couples, and date back to an earlier era; thus, absolute percentages should not be applied directly to current populations. Another study surveyed 717 long-distance couples and 425 local couples, finding only minimal differences in overall relationship quality between the two groups. Ultimately, relationship success depends on the individuals involved and the nature of their bond itself, rather than physical distance. The key takeaway is this: do not assume that long-distance relationships are destined to fail. Instead, couples should prepare for the initial months after reuniting, when personal independence diminishes, mutual understanding increases, and conflicts or jealousy are more likely to arise.

In 2024, 6.106 million couples got married nationwide, a 20.5% drop from the previous year. Meanwhile, 3.513 million divorces were finalized. The oft‑quoted claim that “more than half of marriages end in divorce” comes from dividing these two numbers, yielding roughly 57.5%. The exact figures are 351.3 divorces and 610.6 marriages for that year. However, the two groups of people are not the same, so this figure cannot be interpreted as “half of all marriages end in divorce.” The report also lists a marriage rate of 4.3‰ and a divorce rate of 2.5‰; both use the total population as the denominator, not just married individuals.

Cost

None. It takes just a few minutes to read the section on marriage registration in the annual report from the Civil Affairs Bureau.

Benefit

In 2024, 6.106 million marriages were legally registered, representing a 20.5% decrease from 2023; the corresponding marriage rate was 4.3‰. That same year, 3.513 million divorces were processed: 2.622 million through civil registration and 0.891 million via court rulings or mediation, giving a divorce rate of 2.5‰. The report defines the marriage (or divorce) rate as the number of marriages (or divorces) in a given year divided by the average annual population, multiplied by 1000‰. This is a “crude rate” that uses the whole population as its base.

Note

The common online figure of “over 50% divorce rate” is obtained by dividing the number of divorces by the number of marriages for the same year (351.3 ÷ 610.6 ≈ 57.5%). This ratio is known as the “divorce‑to‑marriage ratio.” Because the two sets of individuals are not identical and the report does not list such a metric, it cannot be taken as “half of all marriages end in divorce.” To calculate the actual probability that a given marriage eventually ends in divorce, one would need longitudinal data tracking the same cohort of newlyweds — data not available in this report.

Over a given period, married people have a roughly 12% lower chance of dying compared to unmarried individuals, while those who have never married face a roughly 24% higher risk. However, this merely shows a correlation between marital status and mortality; it does not prove that marriage directly causes longer life. People who are healthier, wealthier, and more socially active are both more likely to marry and more likely to live longer. These statistics are primarily drawn from European and North American populations, so they can only serve as rough benchmarks for China.

Cost

There is no cost in money or time. Just keep in mind that these figures reflect a lower mortality rate among married individuals — this simply means both conditions occur together, not that marriage itself extends life expectancy.

Benefit

One meta-analysis of older adults pooled results from multiple studies, covering 53 comparisons and over 250,000 participants. It found that the relative risk of all-cause mortality for married versus unmarried individuals was RR 0.88, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.85–0.91. In other words, married people had a roughly 12% lower probability of dying during the study period. Among widowed individuals, this figure rose to 1.11; for divorced or separated persons, it was 1.16; and for those never married, it was 1.11 — indicating respective increases of about 11%, 16%, and 11% in mortality risk. No significant gender differences emerged. Under the most conservative estimates, the RR still came out at 0.94, reflecting a reduction of only around 6%. Another meta-analysis compared never-married individuals with married ones, drawing on 95 separate studies and over 500 million participants. It reported a hazard ratio of 1.24 (95% CI 1.19–1.30), meaning unmarried people faced roughly 24% higher mortality risk over the same timeframe; this gap narrowed with age. A further gender-specific meta-analysis examined 21 studies involving more than 7,890,000 individuals: across both sexes, unmarried status correlated with higher rates of overall mortality, cancer-related death, and cardiovascular death. Among men, the disparity was especially pronounced for cardiovascular and overall mortality; unmarried men also faced a 31% higher risk of stroke and a 9% higher risk of all-cause death compared to unmarried women.

Note

The controversy stems from the fact that married individuals tend to be healthier, wealthier, and more socially engaged — factors that independently contribute to longer life. All three meta-analyses relied on observational data collected from existing populations; no controlled experiments or randomized groups were used. The authors themselves acknowledged potential publication bias and methodological limitations. Roelfs also noted that studies employing more rigorous methods tended to report smaller differences between marital groups. Since these figures are largely derived from Western populations, they can only be used as rough indicators for Chinese contexts.

According to the 2024 National Time Use Survey, men spend an average of 1 hour and 52 minutes per day on unpaid activities such as housework and caring for family, while women spend 3 hours and 29 minutes. Since the survey does not break down data by marital status, there are no official figures on how much housework increases after marriage; the gender gap observed can only serve as an upper limit. In reality, couples can negotiate a different division of labor altogether before getting married.

Cost

There is no monetary cost. Spend one or two hours before marriage to reach a clear agreement on how household chores, childcare, and elder care — all unpaid tasks — will be divided between partners, then follow that plan. The real challenge lies in having the conversation, not in avoiding it.

Benefit

The 2024 National Time Use Survey tracks unpaid labor, which includes housework and family care. On average, people who perform such tasks spend 2 hours and 45 minutes daily on them; men dedicate 1 hour and 52 minutes, women 3 hours and 29 minutes. The proportion of individuals engaging in unpaid labor each day is 67.5% among men and 83.9% among women. Nationwide, residents spend an average of 1 hour and 17 minutes daily on housework; among those who actually do it, the average rises to 1 hour and 59 minutes — a decrease of 28 minutes compared to 2018. Time spent caring for family averages 30 minutes per day; for those involved, it reaches 1 hour and 46 minutes. In 2018, men spent 45 minutes on housework and 17 minutes on childcare, while women spent 2 hours and 6 minutes on housework and 53 minutes on childcare.

Note

Both surveys analyzed data only by gender, urban/rural residence, and age; marital status was not considered. Consequently, no official statistics exist on how much housework increases after marriage; the gender disparity can only be used as a rough upper bound. These figures represent national averages, but couples are free to negotiate a division of labor that suits them — and that is precisely the value of having this discussion.

Without a written agreement, the law presumes that wages, bonuses, business profits, investment returns, inheritances, and gifts received after marriage belong to both spouses jointly. Only property owned before marriage, or items explicitly designated in a will or gift contract as belonging to one person, remain personal property. Couples may choose to agree in writing that certain assets stay separate; such an agreement becomes legally binding. A spouse who has devoted more time to raising children or caring for elderly relatives may request compensation during divorce proceedings.

Cost

There is no cost involved. Simply read the relevant articles in the Civil Code regarding marital property. If needed, the couple can sign a written property agreement; the law only requires it to be in writing, no notarization is necessary. The real challenge is discussing money matters openly beforehand.

Benefit

By default, all earnings from employment, business activities, intellectual property, as well as inheritances and gifts received after marriage are considered joint marital property (Article 1062). Personal property includes assets owned prior to marriage, compensation for personal injury, items earmarked for one spouse in a will or gift contract, and everyday personal items (Article 1063). Couples may stipulate in writing whether their pre‑marital and post‑marital assets remain separate, become joint, or are divided partially; this arrangement is legally enforceable (Article 1065). The spouse who has shouldered greater responsibilities in child‑rearing, elder care, or supporting the other partner’s career may seek compensation upon divorce (Article 1088).

Note

No official statistics exist for dowries, wedding expenses, or marital homes, so no figures are provided here. The amount of compensation under Article 1088 is first negotiated between the couple; if they cannot reach an agreement, a court will decide it based on relevant circumstances. A written property agreement benefits both parties: it protects high‑earners and also safeguards those who perform unpaid domestic duties.

When parents pay for a house before marriage, the money is generally considered a gift solely to their own child. After marriage, without any written agreement, it’s treated as joint marital property. Starting February 2025, if one set of parents fully funds a house during marriage but the gift agreement doesn’t specify it’s only for their child, a court may award the house to that child upon divorce and decide whether to compensate the other spouse. To treat it as a loan, all terms must be clearly documented and signed on the same day.

Cost

There is no cost involved. On the day of payment, write a brief note specifying whether the money is a gift or a loan to the child. Both the parent(s) making the payment and the child must sign it. If it’s a loan, both spouses should also sign. Use the same wording in the transfer description.

Benefit

Payments made by parents before marriage for a house are typically viewed as gifts to just one child, unless they explicitly state otherwise. After marriage, any agreement governs the arrangement; otherwise, it’s treated as joint property. Since February 2025, if one set of parents fully funds a house during marriage without specifying it’s only for their child, a court may award it to that child upon divorce and later determine if compensation is warranted. Factors considered include shared living arrangements, children born together, fault in the divorce, each party’s contributions, and current market value. Partial funding by one or both sets of parents results in a similar ruling, with compensation based on proportional contributions nationwide.

Note

This rule applies to both parties involved. Parents no longer need to rely on a post-divorce loan agreement to protect their investment; post-February 2025, the source of funds itself determines ownership, independent of whose name appears on the title. Recipients of such funds also gain clarity early on. To treat it as a loan, all terms must be explicitly documented, signed, and reflected in the transfer description — otherwise, legal justification becomes necessary.

Money borrowed by a spouse behind your back generally won’t become your joint debt, provided it clearly exceeds normal household expenses and you neither signed any documents nor later acknowledged the debt. Creditors must prove the money was used for shared household needs or joint business activities. However, if the borrowed funds actually helped purchase a house that both of you now live in or own together, creditors can usually prove it served a shared purpose.

Cost

No cost at all. Never sign “joint borrower” or “guarantor” on your spouse’s loan agreements or guarantee documents. Also avoid writing things like “We’ll pay back this money” in messages, as that could be taken as later acknowledgment of the debt. The hard part is staying silent when creditors start pressuring you.

Benefit

Debt is considered a joint marital obligation in several situations: first, when both spouses sign the loan agreement; second, when one spouse later acknowledges the debt, thereby accepting joint responsibility; third, when one spouse takes out a loan during marriage for ordinary household needs. Any loan taken out by one spouse that clearly exceeds everyday household expenses does not qualify as joint debt — unless the creditor can prove it was used for shared living or business purposes. Since buying a house typically exceeds normal household spending, the burden of proof falls on creditors to demonstrate such shared use. Yet if the house truly becomes a joint residence or property, creditors can more easily substantiate their claim. Thus, the key preventive measure is exactly what Section 11 describes: clearly stating whether parental contributions are loans or gifts (nationwide, effective since 2021).

Note

During divorce proceedings, if one spouse’s parents suddenly produce a loan agreement bearing only their child’s signature, two distinct evaluations become necessary. First, courts must determine whether the loan actually occurred. If you can convincingly argue that no funds were transferred, judges will weigh multiple factors: loan amount, payment method, both parties’ financial standing, habitual transaction patterns, any corresponding property changes, and witness testimony. Mere possession of transfer records by creditors still obliges them to prove loan validity. Second, even if the loan is verified, its classification as joint debt must be re-examined. General rules governing loan agreements and guarantees are detailed in Section 8, Article 18.

Starting May 2025, getting a marriage certificate requires only two items: your ID card and a signed declaration stating that you have no spouse and share no direct or indirect blood relations within three generations with your partner. There’s no need to bring a household register, nor to go back to one’s place of hukou registration. The registration itself is completely free, and if all conditions are met, the certificate is issued on the spot.

Cost

There are no fees involved. Both parties must be present in person. The entire process typically takes just a few minutes.

Benefit

The revised Marriage Registration Regulations, effective May 10, 2025, streamlined documentation requirements for mainland residents. They specify that only two documents are mandatory: “(1) one’s own ID card; (2) a signed declaration confirming that one has no spouse and shares no direct or indirect blood relations within three generations with the other party.” The household register is no longer required. Registration is handled by “county-level civil affairs bureaus or township governments designated by provincial or municipal authorities to ensure accessibility.” The previous requirement to register at the hukou location of one partner has been removed. The regulations also explicitly state that “marriage registration authorities must not charge any fees” and “must issue certificates on the spot to applicants who meet all eligibility criteria.”

Note

Registration will be denied only in four cases: if either party is under legal marriage age, if consent is not mutual, if either party already has a spouse, or if the couple shares direct or indirect blood relations within three generations. Any additional charges usually apply only to optional services such as photography or photocopying — the registration process itself remains free. If anyone demands a “processing fee” or “express service charge,” such demands should be refused and reported. The 30-day cooling-off period for divorce registration is discussed under the “Cost” section.

If a person has a serious illness and fails to disclose it truthfully before marriage registration, the other spouse may petition a court to annul the marriage. This request must be filed within one year of learning about the condition. Since 2003, a premarital medical exam has no longer been a mandatory prerequisite for obtaining a marriage certificate; participation remains entirely voluntary. Exact costs and availability depend on local policies, but the exam typically requires half a day to complete.

Cost

In most regions, the exam is provided free of charge or at a reduced cost for eligible individuals; otherwise it costs only a few hundred yuan. The procedure itself takes about half a day.

Benefit

The legal consequences of concealing such information are clearly defined. Current marriage registration regulations stipulate that “any party with a serious illness must disclose this fact to the other party prior to registration; failure to do so permits the other party to petition a court for annulment under Article 1053 of the Civil Code.” The government also promotes premarital exams as a primary measure for preventing birth defects, aiming to maintain a premarital medical exam rate above 70% and a coverage rate for pre‑conception health checks above 80%. Additional policies encourage locating exam facilities near marriage registration offices and offering integrated services that combine registration, medical screening, and fertility counseling. The Civil Code likewise mandates disclosure of serious illnesses prior to marriage; non‑compliance grants the other spouse the right to seek annulment within one year of becoming aware of the condition.

Note

Since 2003, a premarital medical exam has not been a legal prerequisite for marriage; individuals may choose whether or not to participate. Nevertheless, the requirement to disclose any serious illness remains in effect, granting the other spouse the right to request annulment within one year of learning about it. There is no nationwide mandate guaranteeing free exams; a 2020 directive from the Health Commission and four other ministries merely encourages local authorities to provide free services where feasible. Consequently, exact costs and the specific tests offered vary by region; prospective couples should consult local maternal‑and‑child health centers or one‑stop service desks at marriage registration offices for detailed information.

Divorce by mutual consent isn’t finalized the moment the paperwork is signed. Within 30 days of filing the application, either spouse may withdraw it. After that window closes, both parties must appear in person within another 30 days to obtain the divorce certificate; failure to do so also counts as a withdrawal. If one spouse refuses to cooperate, the other must pursue litigation. Courts first attempt mediation; only when circumstances such as domestic violence, bigamy, or two years of separation persist without resolution will a divorce be granted.

Cost

There is no monetary cost. However, it’s worth spending some time before marriage to consider how long it might take and what steps would be required to end the marriage, should that ever become necessary. The real challenge lies in contemplating a potential separation before tying the knot.

Benefit

Under Article 1076 of the law, divorce by mutual agreement necessitates a written agreement and joint application to the marriage registry. Within 30 days of submission, either party may withdraw the request. Following this period, both spouses must apply for the certificate within a further 30 days; otherwise, the application is deemed withdrawn (Article 1077). In contested cases, courts must first mediate. Divorce is permitted when evidence of bigamy, cohabitation with another, domestic abuse, substance abuse, or two years of separation exists, even if mediation fails (Article 1079). Subsequent to a denial, another year of separation followed by renewed litigation also qualifies for approval. In 2024, 3.513 million couples divorced nationwide, of which 891,000 relied on court rulings or mediation.

Note

The cooling-off period applies exclusively to divorce by mutual agreement; litigation entails no such pause but involves lengthier proceedings. Fees for court filings and legal representation vary regionally, hence exact figures are omitted here. While the procedural hurdles may seem considerable, they shouldn’t deter marriage; rather, they underscore the importance of awareness prior to committing.

The benefits your elders gain — peace of mind, social standing, and relief from marriage pressure — are very real. But they won’t automatically translate into better health outcomes or improved relationship quality for you. Meanwhile, the time costs, financial outlays, and exit costs all fall squarely on your shoulders. By drawing two columns on paper and assigning each benefit to the right party, you can instantly see whether this arrangement is worth it for you.

Cost

No cost at all. Just draw two columns on paper. One column lists the benefits that go to you from this marriage — you can calculate those using the earlier sections. The other column lists the benefits that go to your elders: peace of mind, social prestige, and an end to pressure to marry. The hard part is keeping the elders’ column separate and not merging it with yours.

Benefit

The benefits your elders receive are genuine. Yet they do not automatically become gains in your own health (see Section 8) or relationship quality (see Section 4; how good your relationship is depends on your own feelings). All time costs (Section 9), financial expenses (Sections 10–12), and exit costs (Section 15) must be borne by you. Once you keep separate records, you can easily judge whether marrying “as a duty” offers any real value for you.

Note

You may also treat the elders’ share of benefits as a major factor in your calculations; how you weigh it is entirely up to you. A fill‑in worksheet is available at [docs/is-marriage-financially-worth-it.md](../docs/is-marriage-financially-worth-it.md).

Couples with a good relationship tend to be healthier and have a lower risk of mortality. This link is relatively weak — comparable to how diet affects health. In one experiment, wounds on partners who remained hostile during arguments healed at only 60% of the rate seen in couples who stayed calm.

Cost

No cost at all. When arguing, stick to the current issue only; do not insult, mock, or bring up past grievances. The real challenge is keeping your mouth in check when angry.

Benefit

This conclusion comes from a meta-analysis of 126 studies involving over 72,000 participants. Higher marital quality correlates with better health, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.07 to 0.21 (where 0 means no link and 1 means perfect alignment). The strongest association is with reduced mortality, at r = 0.11. Additionally, hostile arguments lead to a weaker cardiovascular response, with r = -0.13. These effects are modest, similar in magnitude to those linked to dietary habits. In another controlled experiment, 42 healthy couples were hospitalized twice for 24 hours each: once for supportive conversation and once to discuss a contentious issue. After the argument, wounds healed more slowly; couples displaying greater hostility saw healing at just 60% of the rate seen in low‑hostility pairs. The next morning, their blood showed higher levels of inflammatory markers such as IL‑6 and tumor necrosis factor.

Note

The B rating reflects that most included studies were observational and lacked controlled groups, making it hard to determine whether poor relationships cause health problems or vice versa. Even after adjusting for age and income, some associations persisted. The original study also notes potential publication bias. Gender differences were not evident in studies that compared men and women. No meta‑analysis directly compares mortality rates between couples in bad marriages and those who remain unmarried; thus the claim that “bad marriages are worse for health than staying single” remains a hypothesis. The wound‑healing experiments involved only 42 couples. The advice “focus on the issue, not the person — avoid insults and sarcasm” is derived from observed hostile behaviors in those studies; no research has directly tested this approach. If arguments persist despite these efforts, couples may consider couple therapy (see Section 20). Physical violence, chronic insults, or threats go beyond communication issues and constitute domestic abuse (see Section 8, Item 43). For guidance on whether to leave a relationship and the associated costs, see Section 15 on exit costs.

Under the law, close relatives include spouses, parents, children, and siblings — partners do not qualify. If no paperwork is done beforehand, when one partner becomes seriously ill the other cannot make medical decisions for them, and upon death the surviving partner receives no inheritance. These three documents each serve a distinct purpose: the power of attorney covers everyday decisions while both are capable; the voluntary guardianship kicks in if one loses decision‑making ability; the will governs what happens after death.

Cost

Notarizing a voluntary guardianship agreement and a will incurs fees that vary by region, typically starting at a few hundred yuan. Drafting a handwritten will costs nothing. The whole process usually takes one or two half‑days; the real challenge is getting both partners to discuss illness and death openly.

Benefit

Article 1045 of the Civil Code lists close relatives as spouses, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, and grandchildren. Article 1127 defines legal heirs as spouses, children, parents, then siblings and grandparents. Partners appear in neither category. Article 1219 addresses surgeries, special tests, and treatments: if full disclosure to the patient isn’t possible, doctors must inform and obtain consent from “close relatives.” Three legal pathways can fill this gap. First, Article 33 permits adults to enter a written agreement designating another adult as their guardian; that person then acts as a legal representative. Second, Article 165 requires a power of attorney that names the agent, outlines duties, and is signed by the principal; this arrangement ends upon the principal’s death. Third, Article 1133 allows a will to leave property to anyone outside the statutory heir list. According to a published article by the Yichang Judicial Bureau, same‑sex couples may notarize a voluntary guardianship agreement naming their partner as future guardian — a practice now recognized nationwide.

Note

In a will, a partner is classified as a “legatee” rather than an heir. Once aware of the bequest, the partner must explicitly accept it within 60 days; otherwise the gift is forfeited. Neither the partner nor anyone with a conflict of interest may serve as a witness. If multiple wills exist, the most recent one supersedes earlier versions, as noted in Section 17.2. Hospitals differ on whether a voluntary guardian can sign consent forms; it’s wise to verify this with your regular medical facility. Should family members dispute these documents, litigation may ensue — first‑instance trials typically last at least six months, with legal fees borne by the parties. For that reason, having the documents notarized is advisable. Any jointly purchased property or shared savings should be documented separately with clear statements of each party’s contribution. Guidance on establishing voluntary guardianship can be found in Section 17.1. The ultimate beneficiaries of all these arrangements are you and your partner.

Marrying while concealing one’s sexual orientation is not legally invalid, nor can it be annulled; the only way to end it is through divorce. A “marriage of convenience” is also a real marriage, so any income earned or debts incurred afterward are treated as joint marital property. When the deceived spouse files for divorce, they may request a larger share of assets and compensation for emotional distress, though whether the court will grant this remains uncertain.

Cost

There is no financial cost. The hard part is resisting family pressure to stay married — this may go on for many years.

Benefit

Article 1051 of the Civil Code lists only three grounds on which a marriage can be declared invalid: bigamy, prohibited familial relationships, and underage marriage. Articles 1052 and 1053 allow annulment only in cases of coercion or concealed serious illnesses prior to marriage. Interpretation (I) of the Marriage and Family Section, Article 17, states that any other grounds for invalidation will be rejected by courts. Hence, divorce is the sole legal exit route. A registered “marriage of convenience” is likewise lawful. Article 1062 designates post‑marriage wages, bonuses, and other earnings as joint property, while Article 1064 treats debts jointly signed or incurred for household needs as joint obligations. Divorce damages are covered in Article 1091, limited to bigamy, cohabitation with a third party, domestic violence, abuse, abandonment, or “other major faults”; Interpretation (I), Article 2 restricts “cohabitation with a third party” to opposite‑sex relationships. Thus, same‑sex relationships must rely on the “other major faults” clause for compensation claims, which may include emotional distress awards — these must be requested at the time of filing for divorce, otherwise they won’t be granted. No court rulings on such cases have been published since the Civil Code took effect; however, a 2013 article on the Jiangsu Provincial Higher People’s Court website discussed a wife suing for divorce after discovering her husband’s homosexuality, presenting two viewpoints: one argued that homosexuality did not qualify as a statutory fault, so no extra assets or compensation should be awarded; the author supported the opposite stance, advocating that the deceived spouse be treated as “innocent” and thus entitled to asset protection and emotional damages nationwide.

Note

Only one analytical article mentions the possibility of extra assets and emotional compensation; it does not describe any actual verdict, so success depends on the specific court. The Civil Code introduced “other major faults” as a new legal basis, giving the deceived spouse a stronger argument. The statutory provisions themselves merit an A rating. If both parties in a “marriage of convenience” each have same‑sex partners, those partners receive no marital protections, and any related property arrangements must be specified separately — see Section 18 on same‑sex guardianship and wills. Divorce procedures, including the 30‑day cooling‑off period or litigation, follow the same rules as any other divorce; see Section 15. Waiving compensation claims in a divorce agreement bars any later legal pursuit. The primary beneficiaries are the deceived spouse; the other party also faces consequences such as divorce, asset division, and child‑custody disputes once the deception is uncovered.

Couples who attend therapy together tend to report significantly higher relationship satisfaction — roughly 70% experience noticeable improvement. In contrast, couples who simply wait without any intervention show little to no change. However, these benefits tend to fade over time: after five years, about half of those who sought therapy still report clear gains, while roughly a quarter end up separated or divorced.

Cost

Couples therapy comes at a cost. Fees are charged per session and vary by location and clinic; no exact figures are provided here. Typically, participants attend weekly sessions over a period of about eight months. The main challenge is that both partners must attend regularly and see it through to the end.

Benefit

A 2020 meta-analysis examined 58 studies involving 2,092 couples. After completing therapy, the average change in relationship satisfaction was g = 1.12 (95% CI: 0.92–1.31), which researchers consider a large effect size. g is an effect size measure; see the glossary for details. For couples who only waited without therapy, the same period yielded g = 0.12 (−0.04 to 0.29), indicating virtually no improvement. The greater the initial dissatisfaction, the larger the subsequent gain. Another review from 2012 reported that 70% of couples receiving therapy showed positive outcomes. One randomized trial followed 134 long‑married couples with serious conflicts; after eight months of two different behavioral therapy programs, satisfaction improved by d = 0.90 and d = 0.71 respectively. Five years later, 50.0% and 45.9% of those couples still showed clinically meaningful improvement. At the same time, 25.7% and 27.9% had separated or divorced.

Note

The main controversy concerns how long these benefits actually last. Another meta-analysis limited to randomized trials found g = 0.60 right after therapy and g = 0.44 after six months; by twelve months only one behavioral therapy approach retained any measurable effect, with g = 0.06 — essentially negligible. A broader review of 20 meta-analyses concluded that clinically meaningful improvement occurs in 40% to 50% of participants. The figures “70% improvement” and “40–50% clinically meaningful improvement” refer to different criteria and should not be directly compared. The five‑year trial lacked a control group of couples receiving no treatment, so it is unclear whether divorce rates rose or fell. The 2020 meta‑analysis included only heterosexual couples; no comparable randomized trials have been identified in China, so results should be interpreted with caution. In China, mental health regulations require that psychotherapy be delivered within medical institutions; counselors without medical qualifications may not provide psychotherapy. You can inquire at psychiatric or psychology departments of hospitals about available couples therapy programs. If seeking outside a hospital, verify the practitioner’s credentials and training. Couples experiencing domestic violence should not begin therapy together. A 2016 meta‑analysis noted that its conclusions apply only to mild‑to‑moderate conflicts where both partners occasionally engage in physical altercations; it does not cover situations dominated by controlling or severely harmful behavior. There is also concern that returning home after therapy might increase the risk of retaliation. If you have been physically abused, see Section 8, Item 43. For advice on how to talk during arguments, see Section 17; for guidance on whether to end the relationship, see Section 15. The primary beneficiaries of therapy are both you and your spouse.

Holding a wedding banquet without registering does not establish a legal marriage; legally, it is classified merely as cohabitation. If one partner dies, the surviving partner cannot inherit property as a legal spouse. If you separate, courts will not process it as a divorce. Completing retroactive registration resolves this issue, and legal marital validity applies retroactively to the date when statutory conditions were first met.

Cost

Zero monetary cost. Both partners simply visit the local marriage registry together, taking several dozen minutes.

Benefit

Under Article 1049 of the Civil Code, "The marital relationship is established upon completion of marriage registration. Those who have not registered marriage shall complete registration retroactively." The Supreme People's Court Judicial Interpretation categorizes couples living together as husband and wife without registration into two categories. Cohabitations meeting statutory conditions prior to February 1, 1994, are treated as de facto marriages. For those formed after that date, the court must advise parties to complete retroactive registration; if they refuse, the relationship is legally adjudicated as cohabitation. If one party passes away and the survivor claims inheritance as a spouse, this same statutory distinction governs: legal spouses are first-order statutory heirs, meaning an unregistered partner is legally excluded from spousal inheritance. Regarding cohabitation relationships, courts will not accept petitions simply seeking "dissolution of cohabitation," accepting only disputes over property division and child custody. Once retroactive registration is completed, the legal validity of the marriage retroactively applies "from the time both parties met all substantive statutory requirements for marriage specified in the Civil Code." Children's rights remain unaffected: statutory inheritance laws explicitly define "children" to include non-marital children, granting them identical first-order inheritance rights as children born in wedlock.

Note

If an unregistered partner dies, you are not a statutory heir, but you are not entirely barred from financial recovery. The Civil Code provides that an individual outside the statutory heir list who provided "substantial maintenance and care" to the deceased "may be granted an appropriate share of the estate." However, you bear the evidentiary burden of proving your care in court if other heirs dispute it. First-instance civil proceedings take at least 6 months, attorney fees are paid out-of-pocket, and the allocated share is determined at judicial discretion. Therefore, complete retroactive registration while both partners are alive. Retroactive registration requires both partners to appear in person with valid identification documents, as detailed in Chapter 10, Rule 13. For betrothal gifts (bride price) return rules when marriage registration was never completed, see Chapter 8, Rule 24. Beneficiaries are you and your partner.

If your spouse uses marital property to lavishly tip livestreamers without your consent, you can petition the court to partition marital property without divorcing first. During a divorce, the court can award the tipping spouse a smaller share or nothing at all. For money transferred to a third party outside marriage, you can sue the recipient directly to return the money; their claim that "the funds were already spent" will not protect them. However, both remedies require lawsuits, you pay your own lawyer fees, and first-instance proceedings take months.

Cost

Litigation is required. Attorney fees must be paid out-of-pocket as they are not recoverable from the losing party under general statutory litigation fee schedules. First-instance proceedings in regular procedure take at least 6 months and can be extended; summary procedure takes 3 months. In addition, you must individually trace and compile bank transfer statements, transaction logs, and platform tipping records.

Benefit

Under the Civil Code, spouses enjoy equal rights to manage joint property. If one spouse conceals, transfers, sells off, destroys, or squanders marital property, the other spouse may petition the court for partition of marital property during the marriage without filing for divorce. When marital property is divided upon divorce, the squandering spouse may be awarded a reduced share or nothing. If discovered after divorce, a lawsuit can be filed to demand re-division. Interpretation (II) on the Marriage and Family Section of the Civil Code (effective February 1, 2025) explicitly regulates two specific scenarios. Article 6 governs livestream tipping: if one spouse uses marital property without the other's consent to tip on livestreaming platforms in amounts noticeably exceeding general household consumption levels, it constitutes "squandering." The other spouse's petition for marital property partition during marriage, or for the tipping spouse to receive a reduced or zero share upon divorce, shall be supported by the court. Article 7 governs extramarital property transfers: if one spouse gifts joint marital property to another person for bigamy, cohabitation, or other breaches of the duty of marital fidelity, the other spouse's claim that such gift is null and void shall be supported. Upon invalidation, the recipient must return the property, and the non-offending spouse may simultaneously seek marital property division during marriage or an unequal split upon divorce. In a typical case released by the Supreme People's Court, a spouse transferred 730,000 RMB to a romantic partner outside marriage over 4 years, while the partner remitted back 170,000 RMB. The court ordered the recipient to return the net 560,000 RMB actually received; the recipient's defense that "part of the money had already been consumed" was rejected.

Note

The livestream tipping provision has legal thresholds: the tips must lack your consent, noticeably exceed normal household consumption standards, and severely impair common marital property. Occasional minor tipping does not meet this threshold. Judicial Interpretation (II) provides relief through property division and reduced shares, but does not provide a direct statutory claim to claw back tips from the streamer or platform. For extramarital transfers, only net amounts actually retained by the third party can be recovered (funds remitted back to the spouse are deducted). You must compile evidentiary trails yourself: bank and digital wallet transaction statements, platform tipping history, and chat logs establishing the extramarital relationship. Property division and divorce litigation timelines are discussed in Chapter 10, Rule 15. Rules governing default statutory joint property are detailed in Chapter 10, Rule 10. Protection against individual debts incurred by a spouse is covered in Chapter 10, Rule 12. Avoiding personal livestream tipping waste is covered in Chapter 5, Rule 8. Beneficiary is yourself. Conversely, if you are the third party receiving funds, gifted marital assets must be returned in full even if already spent.

Who the child lives with, how much support is paid monthly, and when the other parent visits can be mutually negotiated into the agreement. If you cannot agree, the court decides: for parents with fixed incomes, support is generally set at 20% to 30% of monthly income. If agreed support is not paid, you can sue and execute against bank accounts. If the custodial parent obstructs visitation, courts can fine or detain them, but will never physically force a child into visits against their will.

Cost

Zero financial fee when incorporated into an uncontested divorce agreement. The real challenge is sitting down with an ex-partner to negotiate specific mechanics: exact calendar dates of monthly remittance, designated payee bank accounts, alternating weekend pickup and return hours, and splits of summer and winter school vacations. If negotiations stall, contested court litigation is required. Divorce court filing fees range from 50 to 300 RMB per case; attorney fees are borne personally and cannot be shifted to the opposing party. First-instance ordinary procedure takes at least 6 months with potential extensions, while summary procedure takes 3 months. Post-divorce child support or visitation enforcement actions require separate lawsuits.

Benefit

The Civil Code stipulates that the amount and duration of child support and the method and schedule of visitation shall first be negotiated by both parents; if negotiations fail, the court adjudicates. For children under 2 years of age, custody is awarded to the mother in principle. For children aged 2 and older, custody is decided based on the principle of the "best interests of the minor child." For children aged 8 and older, their genuine personal wishes must be respected. Effective February 2025, if one party has committed domestic violence, gambling, drug abuse, extramarital cohabitation, or child snatching and concealment, the court gives priority to awarding custody to the other party. Child support calculations reflect the child's actual needs, parental ability to pay, and local living standards. For parents with fixed income, support is generally assessed at 20% to 30% of gross monthly income; for two or more children, the proportion may be raised, but typically does not exceed 50% of monthly income. For parents without fixed salaries, support is benchmarked against annual total earnings or local industry average wages using the same ratio. For example, on an 8,000 RMB monthly income, child support ranges from 1,600 to 2,400 RMB monthly. Child support is generally payable until the child reaches age 18. Even if a set amount is determined by agreement or court judgment, the child retains the statutory right to request reasonable additional expenses when necessary, such as catastrophic medical bills or necessary educational cost surges. Clauses agreeing that one parent pays zero child support are valid, but if the custodial parent's living standards drop substantially or the child's necessary expenses escalate, the child can still petition the court to mandate support payments. Unpaid arrears under a divorce agreement can be recovered via lawsuit and enforced via court asset seizure. For parents who refuse to assist in court-ordered visitation, courts can impose civil fines or judicial detention, but "cannot enforce compulsory execution on the person of the child or the act of visitation itself."

Note

The 20% to 30% guideline is a judicial benchmark for contested court rulings, not a statutory floor for agreements; parents remain free to mutually agree on other figures. When drafting a divorce settlement, clearly specify the payment calendar day, account number, end date, exact days of the week, handover hours, and vacation allocations to avoid post-divorce enforcement deadlocks. If a parent or relative forcibly abducts or hides a child, petition the court for a personal safety protection order as described in Chapter 8, Rule 43. Divorce procedures and statutory cooling-off periods are outlined in Chapter 10, Rule 15. The primary beneficiary is your child; the secondary beneficiary is yourself.