Search this Site
Home
Contact
Feedback
Mailing List
Topics
100+ Important Documents in United States History

Anti-Catholicism
Apostolic Fathers of the Church
Articles Worth Your Time
Biographies
& Writings of Notable Catholics
Catholic Apologetics
Catholic Calendar
Catholic News Commentary by Michael Voris, S.T.B.
Catholic Perspectives
Catholic Social Teaching
Christology
Church Around the
World

Church Contacts
Church Documents
Church
History
Church Law
Church Teaching
Demonology
Doctors of the Church
Ecumenism
Eschatology
(Death, Heaven, Purgatory, Hell)
Essays on Science
Evangelization
Fathers of the Church
Free Catholic Pamphlets
Heresies
and Falsehoods
How to Vote Catholic
Let There Be Light
Q & A on the Catholic Faith
Links to Churches and Religions
Links to Newspapers, Radio and Television
Links to Recommended Sites
Links to Specialized Agencies
Links to specialized Catholic News
services
Liturgy
Mariology
Marriage & the Family
Modern Martyrs
Mexican Martyrdom
Moral Theology
****
Pope John Paul II's
Theology of the Body
Movie Reviews (USCCB)
New Age
Occult
Parish Bulletin Inserts
Political Issues
Prayer and
Devotions
Pro-Life
****
Hope after Abortion
Project Rachel
****
Help & Information for Men
****
How to Get Pregnant
Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults
Sacraments
Scripture
Spirituality
The
Golden Legend
Vatican
Vocation Links
& Articles

What the Cardinals believe...
World Religions
Pope John
Paul II
In Memoriam
John Paul II
Beatification
Pope
Benedict XVI
In
Celebration

| |
Principle of Double Effect
An action that is
good in itself that has two effects--an intended and otherwise not reasonably attainable good effect, and an unintended yet foreseen evil effect--is licit, provided there is a due proportion between the intended good and the permitted evil.
When there is a clash between the two universal norms of "do good" and "avoid evil," the question arises as to whether the obligation to avoid evil requires one to abstain from a good action in order to prevent a foreseen but merely permitted concomitant evil effect. The answer is that one need not always abstain from a good action that has foreseen bad effects, depending on certain moral criteria identified in the principle of double effect. Though five are listed here, some authors emphasize only four basic moral criteria (the fifth listed here further specifies the third criterion):
-
The
object of the act must not be intrinsically contradictory to one's fundamental commitment to God and neighbor (including oneself), that is, it must be a good action judged by its moral object (in other words, the action must not be
intrinsically evil);
-
The
direct intention of the agent must be to achieve the beneficial effects and to avoid the foreseen harmful effects as far as possible, that is, one must only
indirectly intend the harm;
-
The foreseen beneficial effects must not be achieved by the means of the foreseen harmful effects, and no other means of achieving those effects are available;
-
The foreseen beneficial effects must be equal to or greater than the foreseen harmful effects (the proportionate judgment);
-
The beneficial effects must follow from the action at least as immediately as do the harmful effects.
[See: Ashley, B. and Kevin O’Rourke, Healthcare Ethics: A Theological Analysis, 4th Edition (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1997), 191-95. See also: Marquis, D.B., "Four Versions of Double Effect," Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 16 (1991): 515-44; Cataldo, P.J., "The Principle of the Double Effect,"
Ethics & Medics, 20 (March 1995): 1-3.]
| |
|