# 10. Is it worth dating and getting married? This section breaks down the question “Is marriage a good financial decision?” into several separate calculations. These calculations cover money, time, health, legal risks, and relationship quality. For each calculation we use only figures with verifiable sources — primarily official statistics or meta-analyses that combine data from multiple studies. No moral judgments are made here, nor are any conclusions drawn on your behalf. The health calculations rely on mortality risks, the time calculations use average daily minutes, and the legal calculations follow the wording of relevant statutes. These three types of calculations are not converted into one another. For more details on this breakdown method, the checklist of factors to consider, and common misconceptions, please refer to [docs/结婚划不划算.md](../../docs/research/结婚划不划算.md). ### 1. Getting to know more people rather than fixating on just one: You can’t predict compatibility before meeting someone - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Joel S, Eastwick PW, Finkel EJ (2017). Is romantic desire predictable? Machine learning applied to initial romantic attraction. Psychological Science, 28(10), 1478-1489. ；Eastwick PW, Finkel EJ (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 245-264. - Notes: 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. ### 2. Stop after a clear refusal — continued pursuit is a public order violation, not “sincerity” - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大常委会 (2025 修订). 治安管理处罚法（第五十条第一款第五项、第二款）. （最高人民检察院转载） - Notes: 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. ### 3. Judging whether someone is interested: focus on actions, not “signals” — who initiates, plans, and follows up - 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. - In plain terms: 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 study with 261 participants reached the same conclusion after watching short videos. 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Hall JA, Xing C, Brooks S (2015). Accurately detecting flirting: error management theory, the traditional sexual script, and flirting base rate. Communication Research, 42(7), 939-958. ；Perilloux C, Kurzban R (2015). Do men overperceive women's sexual interest? Psychological Science, 26(1), 70-77. （争议方） - Notes: 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. ### 4. Whether a relationship is good or not depends mainly on how you feel within it, not on your partner’s attributes - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Joel S, Eastwick PW, Allison CJ, et al. (2020). Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(32), 19061-19071. - Notes: 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. ### 5. To build closeness, have two people take turns answering a series of progressively deeper questions — no script needed - Cost: No cost involved. It takes 45 minutes to complete. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Aron A, Melinat E, Aron EN, Vallone RD, Bator RJ (1997). The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: a procedure and some preliminary findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 363-377. - Notes: 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. ### 6. Long-distance relationships aren’t worse than local ones — the real challenge comes in the first three months after moving in 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Stafford L, Merolla AJ, Castle JD (2006). When long-distance dating partners become geographically close. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(6), 901-919. ；Stafford L, Merolla AJ (2007). Idealization, reunions, and stability in long-distance dating relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24(1), 37-54. ；Dargie E 等 (2015). Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 41(2), 181-202. （备注里那项异地研究） - Notes: 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. ### 7. Check registration statistics before listening to elders: what do “marriage rate” and “divorce rate” actually mean? - Cost: None. It takes just a few minutes to read the section on marriage registration in the annual report from the Civil Affairs Bureau. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:民政部 (2025). 2024 年民政事业发展统计公报（五（二）1 婚姻登记服务、注释 5），网页版与 PDF 版. 、 - Notes: 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. ### 8. Accounting for health benefits while adjusting for observational data - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A (controversial) - Sources:Manzoli L, et al. (2007). Marital status and mortality in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Soc Sci Med 64:77–94. ；Roelfs DJ, et al. (2011). The rising relative risk of mortality for singles: meta-analysis and meta-regression. Am J Epidemiol 174(4):379–389. ；Wang Y, et al. (2020). Sex differences in the association between marital status and the risk of cardiovascular, cancer, and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 7,881,040 individuals. Glob Health Res Policy 5:4. - Notes: 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. ### 9. Discussing labor division before marriage helps clarify unpaid work responsibilities - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:国家统计局 (2024). 第三次全国时间利用调查公报（第二号、第三号）. 、；国家统计局 (2019). 2018 年全国时间利用调查公报. - Notes: 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. ### 10. First check the default legal rules regarding money and property, then decide whether to make a written agreement - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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). - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人民代表大会 (2020). 中华人民共和国民法典（2021 年 1 月 1 日起施行，第一千零六十二、一千零六十三、一千零六十五、一千零八十八条）. 国家法律法规数据库 ；条文全文见最高人民法院公报转载 - Notes: 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. ### 11. When parents pay for a house, they should clearly state whether it’s a loan or a gift at the time of transfer - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:最高人民法院 (2020). 关于适用《民法典》婚姻家庭编的解释（一）（法释〔2020〕22 号，第二十九条）. ；最高人民法院 (2025). 关于适用《民法典》婚姻家庭编的解释（二）（法释〔2025〕1 号，第八条）. ；全国人大 (2020). 民法典（第一千零六十二条第一款第四项）. - Notes: 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. ### 12. Money borrowed by a spouse in a large amount — if you didn’t sign or later acknowledge it, it doesn’t automatically become your debt - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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). - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大 (2020). 民法典（第一千零六十四条）. ；最高人民法院 (2020 年第二次修正). 关于审理民间借贷案件适用法律若干问题的规定（第十五、十六条）. （最高人民法院公报） - Notes: 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. ### 13. Obtaining a marriage certificate requires only an ID card and a signed declaration — no household register needed, no fees, and issuance is immediate - Cost: There are no fees involved. Both parties must be present in person. The entire process typically takes just a few minutes. - In plain terms: 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. - 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.” - Evidence grade: A - Sources:国务院 (2025). 婚姻登记条例（国令第 804 号，第二、六、八、十条）. - Notes: 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. ### 14. Undergoing a premarital medical exam: if a serious illness is present, it must be disclosed before marriage registration - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:全国人大 (2020). 民法典（第一千零五十三条）. ；国务院 (2025). 婚姻登记条例（国令第 804 号，第十二条）. ；国家卫生健康委办公厅 (2023). 出生缺陷防治能力提升计划（2023—2027 年）（国卫办妇幼发〔2023〕9 号）. ；国家卫生健康委等五部门 (2020). 关于加强婚前保健工作的通知（国卫妇幼函〔2020〕205 号）：「积极倡导各地结合实际推行免费婚前检查」. - Notes: 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. ### 15. Calculating the cost of walking away: Divorce by mutual agreement requires a 30-day cooling-off period, while divorce via litigation has strict legal prerequisites - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人民代表大会 (2020). 中华人民共和国民法典（第一千零七十六、一千零七十七、一千零七十九条）. ；民政部 (2020). 关于贯彻落实《中华人民共和国民法典》中有关婚姻登记规定的通知（民发〔2020〕116 号）. ；民政部 (2025). 2024 年民政事业发展统计公报. 题录同第 7 条（结婚率、离婚率各是什么口径） - Notes: 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. ### 16. Make a separate tally for the benefits to your elders when they get married — don’t mix it with your own records - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: C - Sources:作者经验，方法类建议；数据部分见本节前面各条 - Notes: 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/结婚划不划算.md](../../docs/research/结婚划不划算.md). ### 17. Treating relationship quality as a health factor: focus on the issue, not the person — avoid insults and sarcasm - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Robles TF, Slatcher RB, Trombello JM, McGinn MM (2014). Marital quality and health: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin. ；Kiecolt-Glaser JK 等 (2005). Hostile marital interactions, proinflammatory cytokine production, and wound healing. Archives of General Psychiatry. - Notes: 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. ### 18. Same-sex partners should prepare a power of attorney, a voluntary guardianship agreement, and a will while both are still lucid: legally, you are not considered close relatives, so without these documents you’ll have no right to sign on behalf of each other or to inherit anything - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大 (2020). 民法典（第二十三、三十三、一百六十五、一百七十三、一千零四十五、一千一百二十四、一千一百二十七、一千一百三十三至一千一百四十、一千一百四十二、一千二百一十九条）. （国家法律法规数据库）；宜昌市司法局 (2021). 意定监护公证：通向彩虹的公证之路. 湖北省司法厅网站「实践荟萃」栏目. - Notes: 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. ### 19. Don’t marry while hiding your sexual orientation, and don’t treat “marriage of convenience” as an easy shortcut: legally, it is a real marriage, and the only way out is divorce - Cost: There is no financial cost. The hard part is resisting family pressure to stay married — this may go on for many years. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大 (2020). 民法典（第一千零五十一至一千零五十四、一千零六十二、一千零六十四、一千零七十九、一千零八十七、一千零九十一条）. （国家法律法规数据库）；最高人民法院 (2020). 关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》婚姻家庭编的解释（一）（法释〔2020〕22 号，第二、十七、八十六至九十条）. ；朱来宽、王洪娟 (2013). 因同性恋导致离婚能否主张损害赔偿？江苏法院网. - Notes: 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. ### 20. When a relationship is stuck in endless arguments and silent treatment, couples therapy can help — waiting alone rarely does - 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. - In plain terms: 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. - 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. - Evidence grade: A (controversial) - Sources:Roddy MK, Walsh LM, Rothman K, Hatch SG, Doss BD (2020). Meta-analysis of couple therapy: effects across outcomes, designs, timeframes, and other moderators. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 88(7), 583-596. ；Lebow JL, Chambers AL, Christensen A, Johnson SM (2012). Research on the treatment of couple distress. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38(1), 145-168. ；Christensen A, Atkins DC, Baucom B, Yi J (2010). Marital status and satisfaction five years following a randomized clinical trial comparing traditional versus integrative behavioral couple therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(2), 225-235. ；Rathgeber M, Bürkner PC, Schiller EM, Holling H (2019). The efficacy of emotionally focused couples therapy and behavioral couples therapy: a meta-analysis. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 45(3), 447-463. （争议方）；Shadish WR, Baldwin SA (2003). Meta-analysis of MFT interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 29(4), 547-570. （争议方）；Karakurt G, Whiting K, van Esch C, Bolen SD, Calabrese JR (2016). Couples therapy for intimate partner violence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(4), 567-583. ；全国人大常委会 (2018 修正). 精神卫生法（第二十三、五十一条）. （国家法律法规数据库） - Notes: 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.