[M]any courts and scholars appear to be motivated by yet another and more implicit concern with the so-called "quality of life" argument. [...] This ofttimes subtle design ultimately proves to be nothing more than a variation of the "slippery-slope" argument. This paper will contend that such arguments are logically fallacious and, at best, sway only by emotional appeal. As such, this style of argument should be afforded little forensic weight as it serves only to further confuse the debate over the constitutionality of selfdirected death.
Neeley, G. Steven
"The Constitutional Right To Suicide, The Quality Of Life, And The "Slippery-Slope": An Explicit Reply To Lingering Concerns,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 28
, Article 3.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol28/iss1/3