Q: Does Dumbledore use Harry like a "lamb to the slaughter"?
A: Oh no, certainly not.
  What he did was much worse.
You see, he realized there was something unique about Harry that connected him to Voldemort immediately after he survived the killing curse. His comments about the scar make that readily abundant. From that point on, we have a long series of events all aimed at a single end result... and that result is not simply Harry getting killed. The end result must be that Harry is willing to sacrifice himself. 

Dumbledore may not have realized at first that Harry would need to let himself be struck down, though I think he knew that at least by the end of second year, when he laid eyes upon Tom Riddle's diary. He still knew that Harry would have to oppose Voldemort.

Now ask yourself: if you're a parent, would you really let your child risk their life to fight against the most dangerous man in the world? Would you care about the greater good of everyone else, or would you care about protecting your child?

So, Harry cannot have a family that cares about him. No parental figure to step in and fix things. Harry has to learn early on that he has to take care of everything on his own, because there is no adult he can trust. Enter: the Dursleys. They gave him a home, they kept him alive, but they never cared for or loved him.
  [And there were other prospective adoptive parents within the wizarding world.]

His time at Hogwarts? Over and over again Harry had to risk his life to save others. Over and over again the professors ignored him or allowed problems to fester. Rumors? Bullying? Students attacking each other? Nobody ever intervenes on Harry's behalf... except for fake Moody, who stops Draco from cursing Harry in the back.

Think about that for a moment. The only person to ever actively intervene on Harry's side in a school incident was a death eater.  Some of you may protest that McGonagall was on Harry's side, but she never actually did anything to help Harry. She put on a good show in fifth year, but she never stopped Umbridge. She never stopped rumors. She never stopped anyone from doing anything. She never even sat down with Harry to see if he was doing alright. She did precisely nothing of any use. The most she ever did was get him on the Quidditch team in his first year... which was lovely, except for the fact that she never asked if he was even interested. That means her getting Harry on the team was done solely for her benefit, not for Harry's, so I don't even give her that much credit.

So Harry wasn't made to feel particularly welcome anywhere... except at the Burrow with the Weasleys. His friends mattered, but he learned early on that he did not. Sirius Black almost had an opportunity to give him a home, but in the end Sirius died trying to save Harry.

And in the aftermath of that event, does Dumbledore criticize Harry for running off? No. He takes the blame on himself, and then immediately reveals the prophecy. Harry is in shock. He's angry, he's barely begun to grieve, and he is easily manipulated... telling him at that most critical of moments that he is named by prophecy as the one to defeat Voldemort ensures he doesn't question or think too hard on the matter.

Again, remember that Dumbledore never criticizes Harry for his decision to try and save Sirius. Harry himself might feel guilty about it, but Dumbledore wanted to make sure Harry didn't start second guessing his need to save others. He loops Harry into his plans during sixth year, and sets up the final horcrux hunt... knowing that in time, Snape would reveal the truth to Harry.

But Harry would only learn the truth after the long and difficult task of destroying the other horcruxes. Harry, the boy who is willing to run off to help someone else without a single thought for his own welfare, who has no real family of his own, who has been utterly convinced that he alone can stop Voldemort, finally learns that he has to die for Voldemort to be defeated.

And what does Dumbledore leave for Harry? The Resurrection Stone. A stone that lets you see projections of the dead... and in the tale, the brother who used it was driven to his own death. What does Harry see when he uses the stone? His parents, Remus and Sirius... and not one of them tries to stop him.

James tried to face Voldemort unarmed to buy his family precious moments to escape. Lily let herself be killed in the hopes it would protect her son. Sirius, a wanted fugitive, fled his only sanctuary and went into the depths of a place where everyone wanted him arrested and executed to fight death eaters to try and save Harry.

Does anyone actually think that the genuine spirits of these people would simply smile and encourage Harry to sacrifice his own life?

No, the resurrection stone was a trap... and Dumbledore, an avid seeker [and one time owner of each of the Deathly Hallows], likely knew that. He was temporarily blinded by his desire to see his sister when he first found the ring [that contained the Resurrection Stone], but he had almost a year to contemplate the stone. He knew full well leaving the stone for Harry would provide him with encouragement to help him on his way to sacrificing his own life.

Harry managed to survive, though that was more luck than anything else.  [Honestly, this happens after Dumbledore died, so one cannot argue that the circumsances of Harry's survival can be attributed to Dumbledore's machinations or preparations, because there is no evidence to support it.  His survival after facing Voldemort was a miracle.]

But he survived only after being completely willing to sacrifice his own life, and let Voldemort strike him down... the culmination of 16 years of setup, ensuring he simultaneously loved and cared about others enough to want to protect them, but did not care about himself... so much that he would put his own life before the lives of others.

It was a remarkably difficult line to walk, but Dumbledore did a masterful job of it. Just enough encouragement and help to keep Harry going, just enough exposure to the Dursley's and just enough neglect at school to make sure he never felt he could go to the adults instead of handling things on his own.

 - David Michael, Quora (July 28, 2020) [with editorial added in brackets]

It isn't even clear that Voldemort needed to die by Harrys hand. Even if one believes in prophecy, and many in the wizarding world do not, all prophecies are so ambiguous that any number of conditions could technically fulfill them. Once Voldemort was captured, by an adult (certainly possible, since the prophecy didn't prevent him from being mostly-killed at least once, and doesn't say that he can't be captured or stripped of his power), all the other death eaters were able to be contained in Azkaban, why not Voldemort? If someone was concerned with the prophecy, had the Ministry of Magic been involved earlier (don't tell me that they wouldn't have believed Professor Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore, Order of Merlin (First Class), Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation of Wizards, and Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot. 

With more manpower, Voldemort, and his horcruxes, could have been captured or collected by Dumbledore; the prophecy could have been fulfilled any number of ways without immediate risk to Harry, or his death.