Introduction
The 21st century has exposed mankind to a new reality, with the issues being highly debated from an ethical perspective. Among such debated and controversial topics is the mask and vaccine mandate. In the last several years, society has had to adapt to new conditions in the face of COVID-19, with new regulations concerning the use of protective equipment, isolation, and social distancing. Thus, although some believe that introducing protective measures against the COVID-19 spread is an infringement on fundamental rights, such regulations are effective in protecting public health and safety.
Summary of the Readings
The article that discusses the ethical issue of mask and vaccine mandates is the one by Margaret R. McLean. The writer emphasizes how, in this unexpected global epidemic, vaccines and masks are essential and required tools for protecting people and keeping them healthy (McLean). The author claims current vaccines are safe against serious disease and death, freeing space in emergency departments and intensive care units (McLean). Moreover, it protects the healthcare system and its staff members, including doctors, nurses, cleaning staff, and others (McLean). Therefore, the article’s content focuses on the necessity to vaccinate and use protective equipment indoors.
Interested Parties and Their Claims
The interested parties include the general public and the government. One fact demonstrates the different perspectives of the general public. A recent study of 1,088 adults by USA TODAY and Ipsos found that most Americans believe that protecting one another and the greater good come before individual freedom when deciding whether to mandate vaccinations or protective face coverings (McLean). Meanwhile, almost 40% of Americans believe that it is an “infringement on personal liberty” (McLean para.4).
As for the government, the legislation offered by the authorities prioritizes public health, which is why the California legislature introduced a bill (AB 455) to necessitate public and private workforce vaccination (McLean). Therefore, the facts illuminate the basis for cultural conflicts. Some individuals view these mandates as an infringement on their rights, while others see them as necessary for the greater good.
Application of Moral Theories to the Case
Several moral theories can be applied to the case of mask and vaccine mandates. The first theory is utilitarianism, which argues that the greater good for humanity must be prioritized. Moreover, deontological ethics argues that each person must protect others from harm.
Therefore, according to both theories, vaccination and mask mandates are reasonable, and such moral perspectives illustrate how such actions are ethical obligations. I believe that deontological ethics best supports the implementation of protective measures mandates. Implementing these measures helps fulfill social duty and protect the most vulnerable members of society.
Conclusion
Hence, implementing mask and vaccine mandates is complex, with ethical considerations and conflicting interests. However, the obligation to protect others from harm is a universal moral principle that should guide human decision-making. A vaccine significantly lowers incidence, hospital stays, and fatalities, especially in susceptible people who have comorbidities and risk factors linked to fatal COVID-19 (Moghadas et al. 7). Moreover, according to the study by Adjodah and colleagues (1), mask regulations are linked to a statistically significant decline in new infections (-3.55 per 100K), deaths (-0.13 per 100K), and the number of hospitalizations (-2.38 percentage points). Therefore, I support such mandates as an ethical obligation to protect public health and safety.
Works Cited
Adjodah, Dhaval, et al. “Association Between COVID-19 Outcomes and Mask Mandates, Adherence, and Attitudes.” PloS One, vol.16, no.6, 2021, pp. 1-26.
McLean, Margaret R. “Thinking Ethically about Mask and Vaccine Mandates.” Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Web.
Moghadas, Seyed M et al. “The Impact of Vaccination on COVID-19 Outbreaks in the United States.” National Institute of Health, 2021, pp.1-16.