1)+2)

Arguments for mandatory measles vaccination:

• Measles can cause severe complications that can lead to death.
• Vaccination significantly reduces the risk of infection and the severity of the disease.
• Measles is very contagious. By infecting yourself, you therefore endanger not only yourself but also those around you, especially people who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. Vaccination is therefore not only self-protection but also lived solidarity.
• A particularly severe complication, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, occurs mainly in young children. Since children do not receive their second vaccination until they are 2 years old, younger ones are not yet so well protected against infection.
• Even though the numbers are rather low now, because of the dangerousness and infectiousness of the disease, there is a risk that the problem will increase again as the vaccination rate decreases. In recent years, measles cases have risen again by 30% worldwide due to the spread of vaccination aversion in industrialized countries and the global migration movement.
• The World Health Organization has proclaimed the eradication of measles as a goal. This would require a vaccination rate of about 95%. In Europe, only Sweden, Hungary, Slovakia and Portugal achieve this rate. Many European countries are even below 85% for second vaccinations. For other diseases, such as smallpox, eradication through vaccination has already been successful.

Arguments against mandatory measles vaccination:

• The right to physical integrity is a high good. You cannot easily inject a person against their will.
• The number of measles cases and deaths is quite low, especially compared to other causes of death.
• There are side effects with vaccinations. The severe side effects are quite rare but the number of severe courses of disease is even lower (at least in the US, which has a high vaccination rate). And even the milder side effects, which are more common, are not something you should force people to take.
• Many people are reluctant to be forced. Perhaps they would be persuaded by the good arguments that exist for vaccination. But if they are to be forced, they are against it. This could also reduce the willingness to vaccinate for other, non-mandatory vaccinations.
• The vaccination rate can be increased more effectively by other, less drastic measures. Most people who are not fully vaccinated are adults who forgot to have their second vaccination as a child. Here, a systematic check of the vaccination status would be enough; compulsion is not necessary.
• An obligation can only be enforced if there are also sanctions. No matter how you design them, it is not so easy to implement them. Rich people will find it easier to cope with than poor people.

3)

Scientific facts that are important for the arguments:

• Severity of the disease (How much danger am I in if infected?)
• Infectivity (How much do I put others at risk if infected?)
• Vaccination coverage (How many people would be affected?)
• Reasons for vaccination gap, beliefs of the unvaccinated (What is the benefit of mandatory vaccination? What is the benefit of other measures?)
• Number of cases (How big is the problem right now? How close are we to eradication?)

Other aspects that influence the arguments:

• Ethical and religious beliefs (e.g., “Vaccination is against God's will.“, “Solidarity is more important than personal freedom.")
• Personal fear of vaccination or disease (e.g., due to cases among acquaintances)
• Trust in the state, authorities (desire for more or less rules)
• Image of man (e.g. "If you only explain things well, people can be convinced by arguments.")
• Weighting of short-term (numbers now) versus long-term goals (eradication of the virus)

This problem can be integrated in the topic viruses and infections in earlysecundary education. Basic statistical understanding is helpful but not mandatory.