While these are cogent points, I would argue against them on the basis of the following facts. One has in the first instance to bear in mind that the main reason for vaccinations is to prevent the spread of dangerous diseases. While there are risks one has to "…weigh the potential risks of the vaccination against the potential risks of the diseases those vaccinations are designed to prevent." (Johns ) Vaccination has been proven to be an effective barrier to certain very virulent diseases for as long as fifteen years. (Mansfield, 25)

The second and most important point follows from the above and refers to the importance of herd immunity. Herd immunity is defined as follows: "If enough people in a community are immunized against certain diseases, then it is more difficult for that disease to get passed between those who aren't immunised." (What is herd immunity?) In other words, the more people who are immunized or vaccinated against a disease the less chance the disease has of infecting others. Put in another way, this theory suggests that if large numbers of the population are immunized then it is much more difficult for a disease to affect those people who are susceptible.

The herd immunity threshold is a term used to describe the level at which a disease ceases to persist in relation to the number of people in the community are immunized. Therefore, if the immune threshold is achieved this will protect those individuals who are not immune as the disease will no longer proliferate. In short, this means that if vaccinations are made mandatory, then this would be the best protection for the population as a whole.

In conclusion, arguments for and against mandatory vaccinations have...

It is clear that this is a very emotional issued. While there arguments against mandatory vaccination that should be considered, one also has to bear in mind that a few individual cases does not justify stopping a process that protects the majority. An even more cogent argument for mandatory vaccinations is the theory of herd immunity -- where the disease is prevented from spreading if enough people are immunized. This would seem tlo be the strongest argument in favor of mandatory vaccination.
Another aspect that should be considered in favor of mandatory vaccination is the term "public good." Consider what may occur if a serious disease was to proliferate in young population. This would certainly have a deleterious effect on the economy and the healthcare system. Furthermore, it could result in social dissent and even unrest. Therefore, taking into account the various options, there is little doubt that vaccinations should be mandatory.

Works Cited

Johns A. Mandatory Vaccinations: Exploring the Pros and the Cons. 2008. December 7,

2009.

Mansfield, P. "Mindless MMR." The Ecologist. March 2002:25.

SHOULD VACCINATION BE REQUIRED? CHILDHOOD VACCINATIONS: THE

BIOMEDICINE PERSPECTIVE. December 7, 2009.

http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590/5_2%20ShouldVaccinations%20Be%20Required.htm

Should vaccinations for children be mandatory? December 7,

2009.http://www.helium.com/debates/79737-should-vaccinations-for-children-be-mandatory/side_by_side?page=1

What is herd immunity? December 7, 2009.

http://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/About_Immunisation/Science/What_is_herd_immunity