In 1996 the government tried to introduce no-fault divorce, but the legislation was repealed in 2001 after requirements on the parties to attend “information meetings” to encourage reconciliation proved unworkable.
In 2015 Richard Bacon, a Conservative MP, introduced a private members' bill proposing no-fault divorce with a year's cooling-off period, but it failed to get a second reading.
There has always been a sensitivity around the notion of undermining marriage, says Nigel Lowe, an emeritus professor of law at Cardiff University who is also a member of the Commission on European Family Law, a group of academics.
This is clear in debates over same-sex and civil unions.
Opponents of no-fault divorce worry that it might make ending marriage too easy.
Other countries, such as America, the Netherlands and even largely Catholic Spain allow couples to divorce without allocating blame.
The evidence from elsewhere suggests that fears of a spike in divorces may be overblown.
Scotland, England's closest neighbour geographically and jurisdictionally, introduced no-fault divorce in 2006.
In the next two years the divorce rate rose, perhaps as some previously made to wait hurried through their split.
But then it continued to fall.
If both parties want to break up, Mr Lowe asks, why should it be in the state's interest to hold up the process?
Sorting out the division of assets and arranging for the custody and future care of children are always the hardest aspects of ending any marriage.
Eliminating questions of who is to blame for the split would allow those involved to focus on dealing with these.