In principle, vaccination must be voluntary. There may be scenarios where individuals may be reasonably expected to observe more stringent forms of transmission mitigation, including vaccination, for example, in the case of healthcare professionals who work with especially vulnerable patients. Such “mandates” would not be unreasonable given the nature of the work and if there were no alternatives to vaccination such as frequent testing. Vaccination requirements, however, should reflect the particular conditions in a given situation. Overly broad or universal mandates are unethical as they cannot, in principle, take into account the various conditions that allow individuals to make an informed decision about vaccines whose long-term effects remain unknown, especially when they do not allow for medical or conscience exemptions or when they place unjust burdens on individuals by threatening them with job loss or inability to obtain an education. A number of school districts across the country, including in California, have required that teachers be vaccinated or, if they are not or choose not to disclose their vaccination status, be tested weekly. Vaccination requirements in schools are not new. Most schools already require teachers and students to have received vaccination against certain diseases such as measles, which is both highly transmissible and dangerous to children.  On the other hand, COVID-19, while highly transmissible, is significantly less dangerous to children than it is to other populations, and this must be factored into any prudential risk analysis. Any vaccine requirement should respect the right of individual conscience and include consideration of the real conditions in a specific scenario,  avoiding overly-broad or universally applicable requirements since not all diseases and vaccines are the same, and not all individuals face the same risks from both disease and vaccine. Individuals, including parents for their children, are best positioned to make such a risk assessment, taking all the particulars of their circumstances into account and weighing the risks and benefits.  Therefore, overly general universal mandates that do not take into account particular circumstances and risk factors do not respect individual agency and informed decision-making.