There is no question that the existence of no-fault divorce, coupled with the fact that in 90% of cases where custody is contested, the woman wins, has created a system of perverse incentives that are detrimental to children being raised in intact homes. Obviously, men are incentivized to stay married no matter what, even in the case of severe physical and emotional abuse, whereas women are incentivized to abandon a marriage for even relatively light reasons. This differential in incentives is reflected in the rates at which men and women initiate divorce, with women doing so twice as often as men. If we can accept as a given that men and women are of equal moral stature and thus equally likely to be toads within a marriage, the differential in rates can be entirely explained by the perverse incentives of our system.
Obviously, even before the no-fault revolution (which was quite specifically championed by persons who self-identified as feminists), divorce was an option for FAULT grounds -- abuse, neglect, insanity, criminality, infidelity, drug addiction etc. There were plenty of reasons allowed for ending this lifetime commitment. But even these grounds were insufficient for the self-identified feminist who would not rest until divorce could be granted for light and transient causes. Of course, these same champions worked non-stop to turn child support into one of the most draconian and punitive systems imaginable.
To their credit, based upon the work of their Frankfurt School mentor and author of The Authoritarian Personality, between insane levels of divorce that have turned marriage into little more than a shack-up arrangement and men literally going on marriage strike out of sheer fear, men have been effectively removed from the lives of more than half of European-American children. Fully a third are born with no father in the home at all. Half of the remainder wind up without a father within five years of being born. Many of the 1/3rd born without their fathers in the home are on various forms of welfare because the men only agreed to the impregnation under terms of not being legally identified. In essence, a great many European American women are using the government as a surrogate father for their children.
The statistics on what happens with children raised without their biological father in the home are quite grim. Obviously, these are averages and there will always be some kid who defies the odds, but overall it is clear that lack of a biological father in the home dramatically increases rates of teen pregnancy, drug use and criminal behavior while severely inhibiting academic achievement.
I would certainly like to see no-fault repealed; as no-fault is a no-win for the future. But too many people have a vested interest in their hedonistic whim worship. They got married under terms that were no more binding than shacking up, and they won't accept a change in the rules.
I believe it would indeed be possible, though, to create contracts for marriage under which the parties surrender their no-fault rights and agree to joint physical custody at the outset, which would make the incentives more fair and thereby reduce divorce overall.