If this has been covered elsewhere or there’s an official SSPX view…please point me in the right direction and delete this post.

Given the marriage vows, what  level (if any?) of domestic abuse is considered grounds for an annulment?  Is it generally advised by SSPX priests to separate indefinitely if need be instead?  What if a priest advises a woman to stay and her and her children are injured or killed by the husband? 

For the first time since finding the truth in the SSPX I find my commitment to them a little wavering.  A solid SSPX priest who we deeply respect told a woman she needed to stay with her physically abusive husband.  He tried to kill her.  I know the modern church gives out annulments like their lollipops but I also can’t understand this priests advice knowing her life was in danger.  And yes, I am fully aware I’m only getting part of the whole story.  Just trying to understand where the line is in respect to church teaching and tradition.  This woman sadly left the SSPX because of it. 

If it is a valid marriage, no level of domestic abuse, all by itself, would be grounds for an annulment.  Separation and leaving the abusive home (and taking the children), yes, nobody has to stay in a dangerous situation, but that is not the same as the marriage being invalid.

If she has children she is OBLIGATED to protect them from the abuse.

Looking after her own safety would not objectively violate obedience. If your description is accurate, then charity and the danger of calumny would oblige the woman, rather than airing her conversation publicly, to discuss the matter with the priest's prior, and if that does not avail, with the District House.

Or wrote them a letter and find a different trad priest 

She is also obligated to protect herself, so she can take care of her children.

The Church allows for temporary separation to give the offender time to correct himself/herself. 

The Church also allows for permanent separation if the offender does not correct himself/herself, or if the abuse continues.

This.

Annulment is NOT a code-word for divorce. There are NO circuмstances which justify the dissolution of a valid marriage, once it is created.
Annulment means "it never happened" -- it was invalid for some reason. So if the husband was going under a fake identity, threats/coercion were involved (one of the parties didn't enter into the marriage of their own free will), or other rare situations.

Generally, the marriage preparation (whatever group you're with) will close all those doors, one by one. OOPS!

The priest will tell you the nature of marriage (exclusive, indissoluble, for the begetting of children, etc.) so you can't claim ignorance later.

Blindness ("Love is blind"), imprudence, stupidity are NOT excuses for dissolving a valid marriage later. A failed marriage, a bad marriage, is still a marriage.

As others said, if physical safety is an issue (for the spouse and/or children involved) then YES you must get a "separation of bed and board" until the spouse amends. This same "separation of bed and board" is an option for the victimized spouse, when one spouse commits adultery. You don't have to "take him back" or "take her back" -- but you can't get divorced and remarried. Sorry.

YOU CAN'T EVER GET DIVORCED, MUCH LESS REMARRIED once you enter into a valid marriage. Many souls go to hell from sins of the flesh, and Our Lady wasn't just talking about "solitary vice" or sins of the eyes. She certainly was also referring to the many "irregular living situations" caused by false divorce/remarriage. Think of how hard that sin is to extricate yourself from, compared to ALL OTHER SINS. You could be free of all sins, but find it virtually impossible to separate from your concubine and get right with God. I know of such cases IRL.

There is an excellent chapter in the book, "The Sinner's Return to God" (TAN Books) that tells of such a story. A man was on his DEATHBED and was ready to part with all his sins -- except to reject his concubine and confess THAT sin. The priest entreated him earnestly, pointing out that he must needs part with her soon anyhow, so why not part with her freely and save his soul? But the man refused. With his dying breath he embraced and kissed his concubine -- and went straight to hell. All the other sins? Defeated. What sin cost this man his eternal soul? An Irregular living situation -- an irregular marriage. Sixth and Ninth claimed yet another victim.

If I could have a promise from God that this or that child of mine could be guaranteed free of ONE type of sin for their whole lives -- without even thinking I'd say "Sixth Commandment".

The SSPX, unfortunately, seems to have a history of considering women whining when they complain of abuse rather than investigate.

I dispute this.  I've actually known several cases where women falsely alleged abuse (Amber Heard anyone?).  And most of the cases of alleged non-physical abuse were in fact "women whining" about having to obey their husbands and where the woman was in fact the primary "abuser".  There's a real danger of being sucked into a #metoo movement.

Although you have been corrected many times you still persist in making false claims that lack of foreknowlege of a spouse’s faults can justify annulment. No spouse divulges all his/her faults. We were all in for surprises.

Remember: for better or worse?

Good post! Thank you, Nadir. Annulments are not easy things to obtain (obviously this is not the case in the NO church) and the grounds for one are few indeed. 

What about annulments already granted in the NO? Does R and R accept them as legitimate? If not, who determines whether the annulment "granted" has merit or is legitimate or not? I think SSPX accepts them as they are but I know Pius the V does not accept annulments after 1967

Perhaps they simply accept them now as is, I don't know, but they used to investigate each one brought to them and then make some kind of "determination" about whether it was legitimate or not ... which is extremely problematic.