I think there is a huge, huge difference between "a risk I was unable to take" and "a risk I was unwilling to take." A person whose child is immunocompromised has to live with risk every day that the risk of vaccination pales in comparison to. So, I can't get worked up about their level of selfishness.
If both immunocompromised children and children predisposed to vaccine reaction face risks, what makes you think you have the right to determine who is more important?
My children are not immunocompromised, but they have had severe reactions to vaccines. Their pediatrician has exempted them from further vaccines.
I don't ask anyone to vaccinate to protect them from "vaccine-preventable diseases." The known risks of vaccines have been massively downplayed, while the benefits for many vaccines (such as the flu shot) have been exaggerated to the point of outright lies. There are indications that vaccines play a causal role in autoimmune disorders, which can be devastating; there is still much that is not yet known about autoimmunity, which means that there is much that remains unknown about long-term adverse effects from vaccines. And, even though some risk factors for vaccine reaction are known, there are NO screening processes whatsoever.
Vaccination is a wonderful idea on paper, but the system has serious flaws, ranging from human error to conflict of interest to unknown/unacknowledged harms to ethical issues.