The fallacy of converse accident is an informal fallacy that occurs when a rule that applies only to an exceptional case is wrongly applied to all cases in general.
This fallacy is similar to the slippery slope, where the opposition claims that if a restricted action under debate is allowed, such as allowing people with glaucoma to use medical marijuana, then the action will by stages become acceptable in general, such as eventually everyone being allowed to use marijuana.
However, a key difference between the two is the point and position being argued.
The argument based on the slippery slope argues against medicinal use of marijuana because it will lead to full use.
[citation needed] The fallacy of converse accident is a form of hasty generalization.