I posted this below, in the why even send him to daycare thread. I am posting it anew so more people will read it. I am doing so not because my wife is thin-skinned (nor am I), nor because she asked me to (she does not even know) but because a variety of postings regarding her abilities and compassions as a mother have, I think, reached their limit. I write also, I hope, to bolster the postings of those who have had sensible things to say about our decision to explore daycare. As I said in the original posting I will not get into a back and forth about this, especially with anonymous posters; it's not worth it.

*******************

I hesitate to enter the fray as I of course have a considerable bias in this matter. I am Stephanie's husband. And of course the father of the "chemo kid" as one poster called him.

There are many, many things that both anger and sadden me in reading these responses. (Luckily, there are many more that please me.) But the one thing that perhaps bewilders me the most is the view of four leaf--isn't anonymity great!--persists in perpetuating: that Stephanie is somehow a bad mother for even considering daycare. How dare you. You know nothing of our circumstances; you assume a tremendous amount; and you're painfully self righteous about it. You have trotted out your opinion on her priorities and riled up others in the process; along the way you have derailed the conversation; and you have impugned Stephanie without the benefit of any knowledge whatsoever regarding what led US to OUR decision to explore daycare.

Did we consider other risks? Of course. Did we spend the previous 12 months keeping our son away from most other kids, out of the grocery store, and not allowing our daughter to have friends over for fear of him catching something? You bet we did. Did we then think, when he got better, perhaps now was the time to explore daycare? Yes, we did. We thought: Let's see what our options are so Stephanie MIGHT be able to return to school full time--something she had entirely abandoned when our son got sick. (I could not leave work as it is my insurance that pays the MASSIVE medical bills.) Yes, that is what we did. We did not, as you so blithely assume in order to make your point (a point I will refrain from characterizing), simply selfishly decide work was more important than our son nor did we ignorantly and cavalierly decide to chuck him into daycare.

Should some of these details been included in the article. Perhaps. But they were not really to the point--nor are many, many other decisions we have made and circumstances we have found ourselves in since our son was diagnosed more than two years ago.

So, I would ask you to stop; you are speaking from total ignorance and...well, nevermind. Of course, you've made a very general and true observation: daycare can be harmful to kids because they might get sick; kids with weakened immune systems are especially vulnerable. But please do not travel further into the realm of baseless accusations of my wife's mothering. It's offensive.

I will very likely not reply; I will not engage in an argument with you or others about this.

Sincerely

Christian McMillen

Kudos on standing up for your family! And my best wishes to your son getting healthier and healthier!!

I , too, replied in another post but since you called me out specifically I feel I should be allowed to respond.

I am saddened that you interpreted my opinions on daycare for an immunocompromised child as impugning or condemning your wife mothering ability. I did not... what you infer from my medical opinion (that placing a very susceptible child in the particularly dangerous daycare setting) is beyond my control. If I have riled up others as you have suggested gives me much more power than I was aware I had. Your wife wrote a very public article about her very personal issue. If she did not want opinion she should have kept it to herself. If you cannot handle any opinion that differs from your own then you also should refrain from entering these boards. Of course I do not know ALL the details regarding every issue you all considered (I never pretended to)... I know what was presented in the article and what my medical training and experience in Pediatrics has taught me. I will not back off my contention that daycare is not the place for an immunocompromised child (or adult for that matter). Your wife is the one who presented her public argument that others should be vaccinated to benefit your child. I happen to agree wholeheartedly with that... but that protection is a drop in the bucket when the child is exposed to ill kids in daycare.

Good luck in your situation. I really do mean that.

I do think that you--Christian--are overreacting to "four leaf's" posts, especially considering he/she/it agrees with the main point of the article: that children need to be vaccinated. While his tone may be arrogant (he is a doctor, after all), his overall point is fairly reasonable--it was simply a related issue that was left out of the article that he was weighing in on. Personally, I'm glad he did, though in no way does it make me question the decisions you've made or feel any less moved and persuaded by your wife's article.

I just reread fourleaf's original post, and I have to agree with Christian that the tone was pretty self-righteous and mean-spirited. Just as an example, "perks" certainly carries connotations of privilege, luxury, and frivolity, and I think Christian's point is that these decisions were anything but frivolous, and it's high-handed and presumptive to assume otherwise. And while you're right that the author wrote a public article about her private life, you, too, have chosen to air your opinion in a public forum, and Christian has the concomitant right to call you out as well. So you think they made the wrong decision; fair enough. But your tone unfairly ascribes a frivolous motive to their decisions, and your protestations that people have unfairly inferred meaning from the words you yourself selected are unavailing. If you don't mean offense, choose less offensive words next time.

Interestingly enough, while you condemn fourleaf for her tone regarding the choices made by the author, the author takes that same tone toward people who make a choice that she disagrees with to not vaccinate their child. Those people also truly believe they are doing best for their children and have good reasons for the choices they make - even if you or I would not make that same choice, or we resent them for the effect it has on our options.

If your kid has leukemia life doesn't cut you a break. It goes on. The mortgage goes on, the car payments and credit cards go on, student loans and taxes go on. The economic system now presumes that two spouses work (an opinion, but as real wages failed to keep pace in the 1970s, wives went to work.).

In fact life adds medical bills not totally covered by insurance.

And also consider that if the kid were locked in his room, if and when he recovered, he would be socially behind the other kids, like I was when I was younger (I have Asperger). The consequences of this in the short term could be ridicule and teasing, then difficulties with friends and fitting in, and finally in the long term, job interviews and relationships. No, the parents are not going to take that away from their son. Their son might never catch up.

So you see, the parents often know what they are doing. Life, economic and social, does go on, and one is forced to participate.

I would recommend investigating an Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit. See if leukemia is a disability. Then perhaps the day care center could be confronted with the possibility of a lawsuit for not accommodating her son's disability as a public accommodation (a day care center).

Christopher Marsh

Master of Arts, Sociology

Web Developer

Alexandria, VA

Oh, Mr. McMillen, you NEVER read the comments!! They will drive you crazy. (For the record, this is advice that is given to me by my husband every time I am screaming at my computer.) Love and prayers to your family.

McMillian,

I don't think that anyone had the intention to offend you or your wife for the decisions that you have made, I can speak for myself and say that I absolutely did not.

but in your wife's article, she offends many parents that choose not to vaccinate by blanketing the remark:

"I realize that anti-vaccine sentiment has been around as long as the vaccines themselves. People who choose not to immunize their children may do so out of the best possible motives: They believe those vaccines endanger their children. But I wonder whether they have fully considered that the herd immunity, of which they are taking advantage, is designed to protect those who cannot be vaccinated. As a result, my son will not be able to attend a day care that would have been magical for him."

When she says, "they believe", she is discrediting the many that KNOW that their children will be or have been negatively impacted by vaccination.

Your remarks are defending your wife, as a mother, and many of our remarks are defensive in nature because there was, whether intentional or not, a judgemental tone in her article about our choices as parents.

Karen Lynn

The day care center cannot force parents to vaccinate a child. Suing the day care center will only drive an essential service out of business.

And quite frankly, small children pass head colds and other lessor sickness like wildfire. If the cancer patient's immune system is that compromised, the child probably should not be in day care, because he will be exposed to all sorts of germs by the other children. And the reality is many working parents send their children to school and or day care when they are sick because they cannot afford to take the time off.

Seriously? You don't think that the child's doctors and the parents have discussed the possibility of colds and other risks of daycare? If pertussis came up, so did colds. The parents themselves are likely to catch colds at some point this year-- the stress of reading through some of these responses alone could torpedo their white cell count. Colds are unavoidable and fortunately, even for the immunocompromised, USUALLY NOT FATAL. Measles is often fatal for healthy kids, for an immunocompromised kid? The risk is off the charts. Pertussis can kill a healthy kid... an immunocompromised kid-- it's crazy-making to imagine what would happen to their son if he was exposed. Even chicken pox which hardly EVER kills a healthy kid would likely be life or death for their son. Their 'chemo kid' as one proud member of the Slate community chose to call him (hats off to you, anonymous internet bastard). So, let's not keep bringing up things like colds and athlete's foot as if they were exactly as risky for this kid as the dangerous diseases we vaccinate children against. It's like comparing riding in a car seat in a volvo to standing helmet-less on the handlebars of a speeding motorcycle ascending a flaming ramp in an attempt to sail over the Grand Canyon. Sure, you can die doing either one. But one is, statistically, scientifically, just a hair more safe.