Lol you're just trolling now. You don't even know how those work.

Calling out the slippery slope argument for being the nonsense that it is is not an example of circular reasoning.

Me sharing my experience and saying that I think you'd have a different view if you had seen what I've seen is not an anecdotal fallacy - that is where you use anecdotes and try to represent them as objective facts.

I didn't dismiss your view via ad populum fallacy, I just said it's pointless moaning about the idea of people dying painlessly if they choose because the debate has already been settled by MPs and the public don't have the appetite to have them backtrack on it.

The appeal to authority fallacy is about dismissing an opinion as being invalid because an authorative figure days otherwise. That's not what I said. I said the debate has been settled, so it's pointless campaigning against right now.

Why do you want people to suffer for as long as possible? What evidence do you have that the law will become so lax that doctors will aggressively push people to being euthanised? Is there any evidence? Because "they just will mate. Slippery slope innit." isn't one IMO.