Restrictive stipulations were a prerogative of many women in society, women from families of textile workers, stone cutters, barbers, cooks, water carriers, copper workers, as well as goldsmiths, merchants, traders, sheikhs and emirs. A lot of the recent debate on the law has also centred on the proposed amendment that would not require a wife to obtain her husband's approval for travel. The debate is, in other words, on women's right to freedom of movement. Ottoman court records indicate that this was also an issue back then. Some Muslim jurists hold that a wife has to seek her husband's approval for any movement outside the marital home.
Historical records indicate that women found ways to circumvent such restrictions.
Some women included clauses in their marriage contracts that would guarantee them a degree of freedom of movement, such as, for example, a wife's stipulating that she would have the right to go on pilgrimage or to the public baths, or to visit her parents whenever she chose. One woman involved in trade added a clause that she would go on with her profession as before the marriage. Wealthy women, like Umm El-Hanna, the daughter of Ismail Abu Taqiya, head of the Cairo merchants, actually restricted her husband's movements. Conditional clauses in the marriage document meant that if and when the husband failed to fulfil these obligations, a qadi granted the woman a divorce without encroaching on any of her financial rights. They were used by women from all walks of life and not just by elite women.