Mill's Views on Mandatory Vaccination Program The argument of Mandatory vaccination has been going long. Mandatary vaccination cold act as the solution to prevent most disease that one can contract in their lifetime. This may seem to us as the ticket to live longer and add years to our lives, however, there are some opposing claims that vaccination, as it stands today, is not at its optimal level. This paper will present the argument of mandatary vaccination, critically analyzing it, and using John Stuart Mill's liberty principle and paternalism to establish guidance and reason. Mill was a moral philosopher who stood for liberty and against paternalism. He established the liberty principle that states that governments and societies can not …show more content…
If Mill had his say about this argument he would not oppose limiting the liberty of choice when it comes to Mandatory Vaccination program for two main reasons that are presented in his Liberty Principle. First, the fact that not being vaccinated may well cause harm to others, children who did not meet the age for their vaccination, as it was claimed by physicians in the PBS documentary. The second reason is the fact that most of these vaccinations are given to children who are clearly not adults. According to his theory, he is against limiting liberties given to sane adults. Mills Liberty serves as a good guide in this moral issue, it can help one critically think about their stand on mandatory vaccination. In conclusion, the idea of mandatory vaccination seems to be a better solution so the choice is not given to parents who do not know enough about the matter and the harm they could cause. This program if implemented can keep away all of the diseases that people have worked hard to eliminate. Mill's hypothetical agreement of limiting this liberty is well supported by reason and can be convincing to those who oppose mandatory vaccination, as long as this Liberty of a choice to vaccinate can cause harm to others, it should be taken