TL;DR Making a vaccine mandatory would be making a mockery of the basic human right for people to have control over their body.

Mandatory vaccination is a step too far in government intervention into an individual’s life and choices. If people are forced to have a vaccine against their will, democracy is lost. It is a human right for people to have freedom of choice over their own bodies. Instead of imposing mandatory vaccinations upon people, governments should rather focus on educating people about the benefits of having a vaccine and encourage people to get vaccinated.

Mandatory vaccinations disregard the personal beliefs and exemptions that people might have against having a vaccination. This includes religious, moral, and medical grounds. Several religions oppose vaccines and enforcing mandatory vaccinations upon them would be to deny an individual’s personal freedom. There remain many uncertainties about what would happen to those who refused to have a mandatory vaccination, would they be regarded as criminals or have to pay a hefty fine because they refuse to have a vaccine?

There are many, many ways to encourage people to have a vaccine instead of legally enforcing vaccinations upon everyone. I’m certainly not against vaccines, but I believe everyone should be able to have complete freedom of their own bodies, and be able to choose to have a vaccine.

Discussions of vaccine mandates must include more ethical principles than personal freedom and bodily autonomy. The issue of distributive justice requires a more case-by-case consideration of mandating vaccines.

Individual liberty and bodily autonomy matter in public health ethics. However, other principles should also play a role, especially in the case of vaccine mandates.

Vaccines go beyond a question of personal liberty. In a civil society, one should have control over their body, as long as their actions do not harm others. In the case of vaccines, they likely will. Individual choice of forgoing vaccines increases risks for several categories of people. In particular, this choice impacts people vulnerable to the targeted disease and ones not eligible for vaccines due to medical allergies. The impacts could happen on a micro or a macro level. The person forgoing vaccines may directly transmit the disease to these people. Alternatively, they could make herd immunity more difficult to achieve and cause an indirect negative impact on these people.

Hence, reducing vaccines to a matter of personal liberty represents an inadequate, shallow, and biased approach to a complicated issue. Instead, one must consider the principle of distributive justice: who bears the burden of vaccination and who benefits from herd immunity? This principle of distributive justice inevitably leads to more nuanced discussions of vaccine mandates. How deadly and transmissible is the targeted disease? How many vulnerable people are there in society? Moreover, the definition of “mandatory” serves as another subject of discussion. What does “mandatory” mean? Would a ban of unvaccinated people from certain public services (buses, schools, etc) count as mandating vaccines?

Therefore, depending on the specific disease, the distributive justice principle can lead to different conclusions. Regular flu does not pose an overwhelming impact on public health. Therefore, the cost of mandating the flu vaccine may outweigh the benefit. For more severe diseases like measles, some more forceful action may become legitimate (banning unvaccinated children from public schools).

Regardless of the detail, discussions of vaccines must include the consideration of distributive justice. A pure discussion of personal freedom and autonomy on this topic makes a mockery of public health ethics.

TL;DR: The government (for the most part) should not mandate vaccines, but employers and institutions should be able to require their own employees, students, and other staff to get vaccinated if it is a dire public health crisis.

Letting the government mandate vaccines could very likely set up a slippery slope of invasive mandates. I am by no means a conspiracy theorist, and I mostly trust the science. With the COVID vaccine, I have little to no doubts about its safety. 99.9% of the time, I will get vaccinated willingly. Still, on a general scale, the idea of being forced by the government to be injected with a mystery substance feels a little violating. I think many people feel even more strongly about this and would take government mandated vaccines as proof of a corrupt and authoritarian government.

That being said, there's obviously a limit to how far personal freedoms can go before they violate another person's wellbeing. If a virus had an exceptionally high rate of fatality or serious long term symptoms, it might be justified. I'm not sure this is the case with COVID.

Businesses, schools, and other private entities, however, should be able to look out for the wellbeing of their community by requiring vaccinations in their populations. This isn't an outrageous idea; you're supposed to get vaccinated before college and travel anyways. It would also encourage people to get vaccinated without the likely backlash and fear of if it came from the government. Efforts should also be focused on educating the public about the safety and importance of vaccines, so that mandating is the very last resort.

TL;DR it depends on the virus.

A vaccine against a low mutational virus, like polio, MMR, etc should absolutely be mandatory: only one shot is ever needed, a single shot grants lifetime immunity, and the risks are low. Making it mandatory results in extinct viruses and lives saved.

However, a vaccine against a rapidly mutating virus, such as rhinoviruses like the flu, common cold, and COVID, arguably should not be used at all, much less be mandated, as they have such low success rates as to be almost useless, and are a waste of time and money. Even I successful, they only provide protection for 5-14 months, as the protein sequences which vaccines teach antibodies to attack become outdated via virul mutation during that time

I think that vaccines should either be mandatory or life should be made very difficult for unvaccinated people. You should never be allowed on public transport and any job where you interact with people should be unavailable because getting vaccinated is not about you.

TLDR Mandatory for what?

If you are referring to making them mandatory for public schools, sure, they probably should be. If you mean that they should be mandatory to avoid going to jail, probably not. In general, there are specific situations in which it makes sense to require vaccines in order to participate in them, but it should be legal to not be vaccinated. This question does not specify which makes it impossible to answer.

The issue of mandatory vaccination is complex and involves weighing public health benefits against individual freedoms.

For:

Public Health: Vaccines are one of the most effective ways to prevent infectious diseases and protect public health. Mandatory vaccination can ensure high vaccination rates, leading to herd immunity and preventing outbreaks of diseases such as measles, polio, and influenza. This is particularly important for protecting vulnerable populations who cannot be vaccinated due to medical reasons.

Historical Success: Mandatory vaccination programs have been instrumental in eradicating or controlling deadly diseases. Smallpox eradication, for example, was achieved through widespread immunization efforts. Compulsory vaccination policies have a proven track record of reducing disease prevalence and saving lives.

Ethical Responsibility: From an ethical standpoint, individuals have a responsibility to prevent harm to others. By refusing vaccination, individuals can contribute to the spread of disease, endangering others, especially those who are immunocompromised or too young to be vaccinated.

Against:

Individual Autonomy: Mandatory vaccination policies can be seen as an infringement on personal autonomy and freedom of choice. Individuals may have deeply held beliefs or medical concerns that lead them to oppose vaccination. Respecting personal autonomy is a fundamental ethical principle.

Trust and Compliance: Mandating vaccines can lead to distrust in public health authorities and government mandates. Voluntary vaccination programs, accompanied by education and awareness campaigns, can sometimes be more effective in encouraging compliance without breeding resistance.

Medical Exceptions: There are legitimate medical reasons for some individuals to avoid certain vaccines. Mandatory policies need to account for these exceptions carefully to avoid causing harm to individuals with specific health conditions.

The question of mandatory vaccination balances public health benefits against individual freedoms and ethical concerns.

For:

Personal Autonomy: Individuals should have the right to make medical decisions about their own bodies, including whether to receive vaccines.

Informed Consent: Mandatory vaccination policies may undermine the principle of informed consent in healthcare.

Potential Distrust: Forcing vaccines could increase distrust in public health authorities, potentially leading to resistance and hesitancy.

Against:

Public Health: Mandatory vaccination helps achieve herd immunity, protecting vulnerable populations who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.

Preventing Outbreaks: Vaccines reduce the spread of contagious diseases, preventing outbreaks and saving lives.

Collective Responsibility: Society has a responsibility to protect its members from preventable diseases through widespread vaccination.