The real question is why would parents of a child with such a compromised immune system place that child in a public setting - exposing him to all sorts of infections that you cannot be vaccinated for. The unvaccinated child is a convenient scapegoat in this particular case.

Exactly! Why on earth would any responsible parent be concerned with what "public" daycare their immunocompromised child can go to? And unvaccinated children are her biggest concern? To follow this argument, this adult should never go to the store, gas station or any other public place, let alone work (have you read the study about how dirty your cubicle really is?). Even though people/children are vaccinated, that does not mean that they cannot transmit the disease. It just means their body might have additional tools to fight the infection. Every door knob you touch, pen you write with, and place you sit is christened with the cocktail of viruses and bacteria you've been exposed to since the last time you washed your hands (for 20 seconds with soap and water (not rinse and run)). While I am sick that the author's child may have cancer, this article smacks of sensationalist BS that serves to inflame the 'you must vaccinate your children, period' crowd. Educate yourself, people, and stop spewing the doctrine that you've heard from the latest "news" report. Personally, I choose to select which few vaccinations my children get. Funny part is, even though I've vaccinated all my kids against pertussis (whooping cough), my 22 month old daughter has it anyway right now. So where did she get it? From an 'unvaccinated' heathen or from someone else who was vaccinated and just got a "mild" form of the disease? What's the difference, exactly? To the person who commented on 'an unvaccinated child taking the author's kids 'right to life'', you're just an idiot. It is the other way around, she should keep her child out of a public daycare and away from other kids period, regardless of whether or not they are vaccinated.