Another reason why euthanasia should not be legalized is that it will lead to the slippery slope argument. According to (Pereira, 2011), the slippery slope argument is a complex legitimate and philosophical notion that normally affirms that one exception to a law is followed by further exceptions until it reaches a point where initially it would have been unacceptable. The slippery slope argument of euthanasia is that if euthanasia is legalized, more importantly voluntary and active euthanasia, it would later lead to the slippery slope of involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia being accepted years later(Esha). Voluntary and active euthanasia is administered with the consent of the patient whilst involuntary euthanasia and non-voluntary euthanasia is administered without the consent and against the will of the patient(DK). The decision to have euthanasia administered is left in the hands of the patient’s family members, doctors or physicians. This results in people getting euthanized when they don’t wish to die due to the abuse of that power that doctors, or physician have(DK). Euthanasia is usually administered to terminally ill patients, but its legalization will lead it administered to certain groups such as the old, the incapacitated, the disabled (both adults and children) as well as patients going through emotive distress who do not and cannot ask for it (marantha). An occurrence was in the Netherlands, where euthanasia is legalised, no less than 1000 patients were killed each year by euthanasia without consent over a 10-year time frame from 1991-2001(marantha). Euthanasia promotes the devaluation of human life, particularly for the vulnerable in society. It will be considered as a treatment option for not only those with terminal illnesses but for people with illnesses that can be cured by treatment and once it starts, it cannot be stopped.