We presented and evaluated a novel methodology in the emerging field of empirical bioethics. Specifically, we explored whether ethically-relevant empirical data from systematic literature reviews can be used in the examination of the reasons for and against a particular normative approach. We attempted to offer a normative recommendation in response to the question of whether or not the risk of SUDEP should be disclosed to all patients. We evidenced that this methodology provided a means of assessing empirical claims underlying reasons. As a result of this process, we were able to provide clear and transparent, if not definitive, justification for a normative recommendation in response to a question of interest.