This comparative case study explores the securitization of pandemics in the United States, South Korea, and New Zealand, shedding light on diverse approaches, ethical dilemmas, and trade-offs in the context of public health security. The study delves into the unique responses of these countries, examining the role of policy, culture, and politics in shaping their strategies. Ethical considerations, such as the balance between individual rights and public health, and the trade-offs inherent in containment measures, are central themes. Additionally, the study underscores the long-term impact of these responses on public health, economies, and international relations, offering valuable insights for future pandemic preparedness and response. The findings emphasize the need for a multifaceted understanding of pandemic securitization in democratic and globalized societies.