I think it makes more sense to talk about these things as legitimate grounds for separation rather then divorce. In other words, the rights and duties the spouses have from and toward each other can be suspended because the marriage is impaired by abandonment or abuse, and the separation deals with that fact. But it doesn't change the fact of the marriage.
People can be abandoned or abused by their grown children, and this can necessitate other legal arrangements. But those arrangements don't change the fact of the parental relationship. Brothers can fail to be brotherly, but even if they kill one another they are still brothers. One's terrible children are still one's children, terrible siblings are still siblings, and terrible spouses are still spouses even if for the sake of sanity and safety they can't be in the same house. It is important to recognize that the two becoming one in marriage form a bond different but every bit as strong as the genetic bonds of blood. But it is true that in our context it is almost impossible to insist on this.
I agree with the intent of what you're saying, but the analogy is not apt. No child took a vow in order to be engendered - there was no volitional act lying behind that fact. Same with siblings. Same with grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, et al. And while there was volition involved in almost all cases of becoming a parent, who that child would be was also (leaving the genetic engineering and abortion debates aside) not a volitional act. No one chose their parent, sibling, or child (except in the unique beauty of an adoptive relationship).
Contrary to these blood relationships, and unique in any family relationship, marriage is a volitional act, and this was true even before the fall. Exactly how this plays out in our heavenly reality is not easy to fully grasp, as Jesus' tone indicates in response to the Sadducees' inquiry about "whose wife will she be?" But on earth the long-standing existence of the term "______-in-law" indicates that we understand this difference on a basic level. Blood is thicker than wedding champagne.
This volitional nature of marital union is part of what makes it such a unique and beautiful relationship.
There never was (or will be) a Biblical means to dissolve a parent-child or sibling relationship. And there will always be a vocational duty to these relatives. There is, however, a Biblical means to dissolve a marital relationship, even if that means is only an allowance for our sinful reality.
The existence of this means does not mean that the dissolving of a marriage is neat or should be undertaken lightly. It is always deeply costly in both practical and spiritual ways. Separating one flesh back into two is not a neat incision, but a messy tear, no matter how much a "no-fault divorce/intentional de-coupling" society may wish to look away from that reality. Part of that one-flesh union will always remain a part, long after the divorce paperwork is complete and the storage units emptied out.
Upholding the marriage covenant is a vital and Godly pursuit. But let's not do it at the expense of taking abuse seriously or undermining the unique beauty that is a one-flesh marriage of man and wife.