Situation Ethics by Joseph Fletcher

Summary:
1. There can be rules for ethics but there are always exceptions to those rules.
2. There are no universal laws.
3. Christian ethics is a situation ethic.
4. Love (Agape) is the law for Christians and it is not relational.
5. The end justifies the means.

Fletcher makes a strong case for situation ethics. Why is it difficult for people to make sense of situation ethics? How can they do it?
Fletcher maintains that the law for Christians is love, more specifically, agape. He says, "Agape is giving love--non-reciprocal, neighbor regarding--'neighbor' meaning 'everybody,' even an enemy" (79). Loving one's neighbor is an important commandment for Christians. In fact, Jesus commands us to love one another. So what is difficult about accepting Fletcher's ethics? It is not for anyone to say "this is right" or "that is wrong" according to situation ethics. Each situation is unique and requires thought and consideration for the greatest good. Herein lies the difficulty. When people are confronted with ethical issues, they search for an easy answer. "The law," to Fletcher, provides those answers through absolutes. It is challenging to take each situation as an individual problem and to seek out its most appropriate response. He says, "A common objection to situation ethics is that it calls for more critical intelligence, more factual information, and more self-starting commitment to righteousness than most people can bring to bear" (81). All one has to do is think of an ethical issue and it becomes clear that making a choice (especially when it pertains to life or death) is incredibly complex.
Of course, maybe the choice doesn't seem so hard. The Church teaches that killing is wrong, no matter what. Aborting fetuses, euthanizing the elderly and infirm, murder--all of these are unacceptable. There are no situations that can validate taking another human life. (Although there is a Just War Theory). Maybe there is no difficulty for some Catholics in situation ethics because they simply view Fletcher's ideas as wrong and as an easy excuse for people to do what they want. However, this is not Fletcher's point at all. He does not encourage people to make excuses or act irresponsibly. He does encourage love as a motivation for making the right choices. He maintains we are called to choose what is useful and good for the most people in a given situation (95, 96, 97, 115, 119).
If we want to make sense of situation ethics, we must accept Fletcher's principles of love for all and doing good for the sake of that love. It is necessary to take the responsibility of making an ethical decision--of becoming well informed on a subject one is unfamiliar with and seeking advice when a situation is extremely challenging. On the contrary, if one does not see value in Fletcher's situation ethics and accepts moral absolutes instead, that is their decision.
So with these two extremes of accepting or not accepting Fletcher's ethics, what are our other options? Is there a middle road? If there is, what would Fletcher say about it?