Feline alimony: Istanbul divorce case breaks new ground
An unusual clause in a divorce agreement between Istanbul residents has sparked wide public discussion. The ex-husband agreed to make regular payments for the upkeep of two cats that remained with his former wife, Kazinform News Agency reports.
According to İhlas News Agency (İHA), Buğra and Ezgi, who had been married for two years, decided to separate. Custody of their two cats was granted to Ezgi, while Buğra will transfer 10,000 Turkish lira (USD 240) every three months to cover their care expenses. In addition, the man will pay his former spouse 550,000 lira (USD 13,100) in compensation.
The agreement stipulates that the cats will stay with Ezgi for up to ten years. During this time, the ex-husband must cover the costs of veterinary services, food, and other care-related needs. The payment amount will be adjusted annually according to inflation data from the Turkish Statistical Institute.
Lawyer Aylin Esra Eren described the case as an example of changing attitudes in Türkiye toward animal welfare in family disputes. She explained that, from a legal perspective, the owner of an animal is determined by the microchip registration. If spouses acquire pets during marriage, it is important to identify whose name appears on the registration, since that person bears responsibility for the animal’s health, care, and safety. She added that neglecting a chipped pet may be considered a legal violation.
Eren also noted that cats are territorial by nature and do not adapt well to frequent changes of environment, therefore the decision to keep them in one home corresponds to their natural needs and ensures emotional stability.
The lawyer emphasized that although such payments are not formally classified as alimony, they serve a similar function by ensuring regular financial support for animal care. She added that the agreement could be considered a symbolic precedent, as the ex-husband agreed to share the costs of maintaining the pets as if they were joint dependents. The document also notes that the payments will stop if the animals pass away.
The case has generated active discussion on social media, where users described it as a humane and progressive example of how modern family agreements can reflect care for animals.
Earlier, it was reported that an editorial in Saamna criticizing “excessive compassion” for animals amid poverty sparked debate in India. The article followed a Supreme Court order to relocate stray dogs to shelters.