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