Mary-Ann and her husband Bill stopped sleeping together seven years before their marriage ended. When her hot flushes made the bed unbearable, Bill moved to another bedroom.
Intimacy visits stopped after two years. Arguments widened the gap, and they took separate holidays.
Bill kept his inheritance separate from joint finances. Mary-Ann says he was "quiet quitting" the marriage, while she focused on a demanding new job.
By late 2025, their blended family still lived together, but the relationship was over.
Mary-Ann suggested she move out while the house was prepared for sale, but Bill insisted she pay half the mortgage until it sold.
She couldn't afford that, so they stayed under the same roof for five more months.
A Growing Trend
Mary-Ann and Bill are part of a rising number of couples forced to cohabit after separation because neither can afford a second household.
This is called "separation under the same roof" (SUSR).
Data from Australia's federal circuit and family court shows the share of divorcing couples reporting SUSR rose from 15% in 2020–2021 to 19% in 2024–2025.
Elisabeth Shaw, a clinical psychologist and CEO of Relationships Australia NSW, says cost of living is "front and centre" but adds that a lack of housing stock is also key.
"Those two factors create a vortex of misery," she says.
Nearly a third of Australians say cost of living pressures their relationship, making it the top relationship stressor.
Yet financial pressures also make separation impossible.
Research from the University of Sydney suggests rapid house price growth may be locking people into marriages.
Economist Dr Luke Hartigan notes that higher house prices make running two households more costly, so couples are more likely to stay together.
Conflict Under One Roof
Shaw describes "Robert" and "Jane," who sought counselling after eight months living together post-separation.
Robert moved into his son's bedroom, but the couple fought constantly, and Jane cried often. They couldn't afford two homes or even two rentals.
"Both were increasingly stressed but were stuck," Shaw says.
Another couple spent a year in conflict under one roof, drawing their children into the combat. Neither would move out.
"Their financial picture looked pretty bleak," Shaw says, adding that some couples stay for the children or until the house sells.
But she notes that few couples part amicably enough to tolerate it long-term.
Family law specialist Tara Houseman has seen couples divide homes into zones and argue over mundane issues like who empties the dishwasher or uses more electricity.
One couple engaged in passive-aggressive battles over hallway lights. Tensions escalate when one partner starts dating again, which Shaw calls "excruciating."
For some women, SUSR is dangerous. Financial pressures can trap them with abusive partners.
Sally Renfrey, a financial counsellor, says that on income support, finding an affordable rental is "virtually impossible."
One woman interviewed said her partner's violence escalated over five years, but financial pressures repeatedly drew her back.
"I just couldn't afford to live," she said.
Renfrey notes that separating couples face uncertainty over assets until a property is sold and proceeds divided.
That makes it hard to know what they can afford to rent or buy.
"There are two elements: external economic factors and lack of financial certainty until the split is resolved," she says.
Mary-Ann and Bill eventually sold their home amicably.
They worked together to fix it up, and the real estate agent called them one of the loveliest couples she'd worked with.
Some nights they watched TV together. But by the time contracts were exchanged, Mary-Ann moved out six weeks before settlement.
"If I had to keep looking at him I was going to become angry," she said.
