Is there any evidence from the Netherlands euthanasia expierience that legiliying euthanasia creates a slippery slope?

Essay from the year 2011 in the subject Philosophy - Practical (Ethics, Aesthetics, Culture, Nature, Right, ...), grade: 1,0, , language: English, abstract: Euthanasia is defined as the intentionally termination of the life of a person upon his or her explicit request. Although, in this limited sense, the legislation of active euthanasia, as accepted in April 2001 in The Netherlands, has provoked a lot of debates. It is often said, once voluntary euthanasia has become legal, we will have set foot on a slippery slope that will lead to tolerating other forms of euthanasia, including non-voluntary euthanasia. If true, this is a powerful argument in the battle of those who oppose to the legalization of euthanasia. However, as many facets of the medical practice of euthanasia remain unclear, and no reliable records on the actual practice of euthanasia exist, the power of any slippery slope argument is limited. Experience in The Netherlands may shed light on both sides of the medal. This paper consists of four parts. First, I explain the laws that control euthanasia in The Netherlands and elucidate the cultural background in which they originated. Second, I examine more closely the argument of the slippery slope and distinguish a logical and an empirical version. Thirdly, I concentrate on whether experiences in The Netherlands justify any concern about the slippery slope argument. Finally, by addressing questions like 'Could euthanasia be safely regulated in other countries?' or 'Has legalizing euthanasia set off knock-on effects?' I conclude briefly that Dutch experiences certainly justify some caution.