A couple of other treatments of this general topic with slightly different twists.
This author calls it the "Fallacy of Infinite Value", and points out that life, while valuable, is not infinitely valuable as the "If it saves one life..." argument implies. Society makes daily decisions that weigh the cost of human life against various returns.
http://scruffylookingcatherder.com/?tag=/Infinite+Value
This author approaches the fallacy from the standpoint that while the "If it saves one life..." argument attempts to imply that human life is being weighed against something less valuable, it is very often true that a more careful analysis will demonstrate that there is actually a life vs. life balance that is not immediately obvious.
http://www.pathsoflove.com/blog/2013...mensurability/
For example, the argument that banning privately owned guns must be done if it saves one life, generally ignores the fact that privately owned guns are frequently used to save lives. In the final analysis, banning them could actually cost more lives than it saves.