Crowdvid19

The paper is well structured and written by experienced researchers. It provides good arguments using measurable tools such as "expected usefulness" of mandatory vaccination and the comparison with influenza vaccine is appropriate and valuable. Conclusions are reasonable according to the given methodology.

However, the document is too public health oriented and does not pay enough attention to human rights. Even when it does claim that "if the public health threat were grave and if mandatory vaccination were more likely to be successful than any other strategy, and the cost to children was sufficiently small, it might be justified", it is difficult to determine what is "sufficiently small" and even "small" could be debatable. Additionally, in a human rights approach, the right of the parents to decide over the health (and life) of their kids and the impossibility of children to consent the risk of vaccination is not enough addressed.

This article does contain relevant and scientifically validated data concerning the vaccination of children. The sources are properly cited and arguments well supported. However, it could definitely use more evidence to support or argue against the impact of mandatory vaccination on opening schools.

**The article might use outdated data.**
One of the key point of the benefice/risk balance is the role that children have in covid transmission. The article only shows an article explaining that children might not be involved a lot in covid transmission (Muro, Faust, 2020). This article was however accepted more than one year ago (april 2020). There's surely better evidences published now.
More generally, the article was written before the phase 3 of testing of the covid vaccines. By now, we should have more information on the effectiveness of the vaccines, on the way it is effective (reducing transmission, reducing hospitalization), etc.