Critics of this approach claim that consequences are weighed too heavily allowing for inherently evil acts to be too easily justified in some situations (Ashley & O’Rourke, 1997).

An alternative approach is that of prudential personalism. This ethical framework takes into account the unique manner in which human nature is embodied in each individual, the role of individual intelligence and free will in making life choices, and considerations of individual diversity in relation to our inherently communal nature. This model places friendship with God and other persons as the supreme good to which all other goods are subordinated, and rejects abstract ideals and values as the sole basis for moral reflection. Instead, proponents of prudential personalism contend that a “practical, goal-seeking, situational, contextual” methodology is possible by starting with the ultimate goal of human life and posing the question, ”How does this action in its context contribute to the growth of persons in community?” However, outward consequences are assessed secondarily to inward motive and self-realization (Ashley & O’Rourke, 1997).

A strength of the Catholic moral tradition in health care ethics lies in the specific guidance given with respect to medical decision-making on a number of complex issues including abortion, assisted reproduction, end-of-life care, euthanasia and emerging genetic technologies. The primary weakness lies in its applicability as an ethical justification for people who do not share the assumptions of natural law in general or specific theological assumptions embedded within Catholic theology.