successful in this marriage. This should not be allowed, especially if it becomes clear to the judge that the hardship is caused by the husband—for example, if he does not pray and it is impossible to establish proof against him. In such a case, the view that it is obligatory is very strong.
If a pregnant woman obtains khulʿ in return for maintenance during her waiting period, it is valid. It is also valid in return for an unspecified consideration. Thus, if she obtains khulʿ in return for the offspring of her tree or her slave-girl—
His statement: “If a pregnant woman obtains khulʿ in return for maintenance during her waiting period, it is valid.” When a pregnant woman is divorced, her husband must provide for her. Allah, Exalted is He, says: “And if they are pregnant, then spend on them until they give birth.” [al-Talaq 65:6] Thus, Allah, Exalted is He, has made maintenance obligatory upon the husband when she is pregnant. It is not necessary for the woman seeking khulʿ to offer money. For example, if a pregnant woman asks her husband for khulʿ and he says, “Give me compensation,” and she replies, “The compensation is that I waive your obligation to provide maintenance for the pregnancy,” this is valid. In reality, she has obtained khulʿ in return for compensation, since had she not sought khulʿ, he would have been obliged to provide maintenance.
Although maintenance is obligatory in this case, is it due to the woman herself, or is it due to the unborn child for the woman’s sake?
The scholars differed concerning maintenance for a pregnant woman observing her waiting period. Some said that the maintenance is for the wife because of the pregnancy; others said that it is for the unborn child. This is the established position of the school, and a number of issues follow from it, which Ibn Rajab mentioned in al-Qawaʿid. One of them is that if we say the maintenance belongs to the woman, then he must pay zakat al-fitr on her behalf, because he supports her during Ramadan. But if we say that the maintenance belongs to the unborn child, then he is not required to do so, because paying on behalf of a fetus is not obligatory.
The correct view is that both matters together are the reason for the maintenance. Evidence for this is that, according to the stronger view, if the fetus dies in her womb, maintenance remains obligatory.