I'm not sure if the "fixing" trope really counts here. They were married in Regency-era England; she literally couldn't leave him for someone else.

They both had issues to work out with each other. By the show's end, they'd both committed to working those issues out, but that doesn't mean they'll disappear tomorrow.

And on Daphne's end, she does face repercussions. She gives up children as a precondition to their marriage. She doesn't ask for them when they're dancing in the rain. She wants to make their relationship work regardless. That unconditional support helps Simon move on from his toxic oath to his father. But he makes the choice to have children on his own accord. Daphne yielded.

I like your analysis a lot, but this larger debate seems to be missing that, as you noted, fiction thrives on moral ambiguity. Bridgerton is compelling television precisely because its central relationship is morally complicated. And I suspect the only way other shows can avoid this scrutiny is to be about men.