Introduction
There are many debates and disagreements in every society, especially on the topics concerning controversial issues and problems. The COVID-19 pandemic has been the main topic in media over the past year and a half, and it continues to attract the attention of people. One of the most controversial points related to the pandemic is the introduction of mandatory vaccination. There are generally two sides in the case of mandatory vaccination, one supporting such an initiative and the other opposing it. It is interesting to explore these two views in detail and analyze them from the perspectives of ethical egoism and social contract ethics.
Position for Mandatory Vaccination
The first moral reasoning used in the support of mandatory vaccination implies that such measures will help the entire country reduce the number of deaths from the disease. In other words, introducing mandatory vaccination is morally right because it saves numerous people from becoming victims of the deadly virus. Thus, getting vaccinated is a moral duty of every citizen in the country because it reduces the overall risk of contracting the disease for all of their fellow compatriots.
The second reason in support of mandatory vaccination is the claim that such action is moral because it will expand citizens’ freedoms by removing various government restrictions which prevent people from engaging in different activities. For instance, there are still travel restrictions and limitations, including social distancing for businesses that cannot operate at their full capacity. There is evidence that shutdown policies introduced as a result of the pandemic lead to higher rates of unemployment (Kong & Prinz, 2019). Therefore, it would be morally correct to utilize mandatory vaccination to accelerate the provision of more freedoms to citizens enabling them to do what they want.
Position Against Mandatory Vaccination
There are also arguments against the implementation of mandatory vaccination; one of the states that it is morally correct to let people be free in their choice to engage in certain activities. Essentially, every person must be the only one in charge of what they deem appropriate to inject into their body. Forcing people to inoculate against their will would be immoral and would violate their human rights.
Additionally, another reason why it is ethical to avoid mandatory vaccination is the prevention of various negative health effects such as anaphylaxis reported by those who took COVID-19 vaccines (“Safety of COVID-19 vaccines,” 2021). In other words, there is no guarantee that the vaccines will be safe and effective for everyone and will not cause dangerous side effects. Thus, discarding the option of mandatory vaccination is morally right conduct because it does not imply subjecting people to experimental treatment, which can cause severe health-related effects.
Ethical Egoist Position
Ethical egoism is a popular theoretical framework that is often employed by numerous people, even unconsciously. Ethical egoism implies securing personal interests and deriving the maximum amount of benefit from every situation while neglecting the interests of others (Khansari & Sadeghi, 2020). It would be reasonable to assume that an ethical egoist would oppose mandatory vaccination.
To justify their position, they would say that vaccination should be a personal choice since they would not want to be forced to take the vaccine if they refused to do it voluntarily. For an ethical egoist, there is no conflict between self-loyalty and community because they think only about themselves. I believe that embracing the ethical egoism approach and avoiding mandatory vaccination is the worst course of action since it does not benefit the entire society.
Social Contract Ethicist Position
Social contract ethics involve following universal rules accepted as a norm in a certain society. Essentially, entering a social contract implies abiding by a law that benefits the society in which it is followed (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). As a result, a social contract ethicist would fully support the introduction of mandatory vaccination. Such a person would say that compulsory vaccination would facilitate the return to normal life and would reduce the number of unnecessary deaths due to the virus. Yet, there could be a collision between personal and national obligations if the social contract ethicist would be against vaccination whatsoever. I believe that embracing social contract ethics and implementing mandatory vaccination is the best course of action because it will quickly resolve the pandemic.
Mandatory Vaccination and Professional Code of Ethics of Nurses
If the mandatory vaccination order is introduced, nurses will be the primary actors responsible for conducting inoculation, yet they may face certain moral challenges. According to the ANA code for nurses, nursing professionals must respect the dignity of their clients (Olson & Stokes, 2016). Nevertheless, if a nurse is forced to vaccinate a person who does not want to receive the vaccine, it can lead to an ethical problem. Mandatory vaccination also can provoke a conflict between professional and familial duties if the nurse has to vaccinate a relative who does not want to do it.
Conclusion
The issue of mandatory inoculation is a topical one considering the fact that the current vaccination rates are still low. There can be two approaches to the issue, one supporting it and the one opposing the implementation of mandatory vaccination. Ethical egoists would be more in favor of discarding the option of compulsory vaccination, while social contract ethicists would be willing to make taking the vaccine obligatory.
References
Khansari, M., & Sadeghi, H. (2020). Feasibility study of altruistic ethical responsibility in ethical egoism. Religious Anthropology, 16(42), 127–142. Web.
Kong, E., & Prinz, D. (2020). Disentangling policy effects using proxy data: Which shutdown policies affected unemployment during the COVID-19 pandemic?Journal of Public Economics, 189, 1–39. Web.
Olson, L. L., & Stokes, F. (2016). The ANA code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements: Resource for nursing regulation. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 7(2), 9–20. Web.
Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.
Safety of COVID-19 vaccines. (2021). CDC. Web.