The article examines the ethical and legal implications of a less voluntary vaccination policy (for adults) in the Netherlands, specifically in relation to COVID-19. The Netherlands traditionally follows a voluntary vaccination strategy. However, as the European Court of Human Rights has acknowledged that mandatory vaccination can be justified if it is proportionate and essential for safeguarding public health, and the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the alteration of vaccination in multiple European countries, societal and political debate has been initiated. This article aims to add to the existing debate on vaccination strategy in The Netherlands by addressing the topic from a multidisciplinary lens.

The study involved interviews with medical, legal, and ethical experts in the Netherlands to establish what their opinions were on a less voluntary vaccination strategy. These experts discussed a range of interventions, including providing information such as advice, persuading, nudging, pressuring, and coercion. Proponents of a less voluntary vaccination strategy cited epidemiological circumstances, collective responsibility, and professional duty as reasons to prioritize public health. However, doubts were expressed about such a policy's necessity and potential negative consequences, including increased polarization and misinformation.