Updating family laws is an important juristic and social problem. This article argues that the Ahl al-Bayt (as) tradition provides practical precedents for context-sensitive legal reasoning, showing that the implementation of rulings may change when their subject-matter, social function, or consequences change. According to a well-established theory in Shiite jurisprudence, legal rulings are grounded in real interests and harms. The permanence of Islam, therefore, does not lie in the rigidity of every legal form, but in its capacity to establish enduring principles that can guide changing human circumstances.Within this framework, mahr had a specific function in earlier social contexts. In contemporary society, however, it has often been transformed into a sign of women’s social status or a guarantee for marital continuity. This transformation has contributed to the spread of excessive mahr and has created significant social and legal difficulties. Since the Islamic legal system defines the family as an institution aimed at moral growth, mutual responsibility, and the upbringing of righteous children, family laws must be evaluated in light of these purposes. This article suggests that the contemporary legal structure of mahr and the unilateral male right to divorce in permanent marriage should be reconsidered. Instead of treating excessive mahr as an immediately enforceable debt and divorce as a one-sided male prerogative, the law should allow both spouses to seek judicial divorce under clearly defined conditions, while protecting women’s financial rights through fair and balanced legal mechanisms. Such reform would necessarily require corresponding changes in other family laws.