Quick reassurance needed please

I am really not reading the guidelines posted previously in the thread the same way that everyone else seems to be.

It talks of suitable toilet facilities and washing facilities, it talks of the need for separate toilet facilities but does not then mention washing facilities. This may be just semantics but as they are mentioned separately at one point, it should perhaps not be presumed that the further reference to toilet facilities includes hand washing facilities too. I think when it talks of a room it means full walls and a door, and doesn't intend for these to be called a cubicle. The sinks outside are unarguably mixed sex but there is nothing specific in the guidelines that doesn't permit this.

Whilst it can be argued that it is a bad idea for many reasons, I'm not sure that from a legal pov it can.

To add a caveat I am imagining the facilities in my DC school and what they are like, I'm aware that in other schools they may look very different. As I previously said the school was built 11 years ago and have always been like this. I would presume/ hope that they were built within the law.

CharlieParley
Thank you much better explanation than my attempt.

However in this day and age if those spaces are going to be protected then unisex spaces need to be created along side single sex.

The described toilets are not unisex toilets.

Unisex has a specific meaning in regard to sanitary facilities.

Ordinary toilets with a bank of cubicles and shared sinks are multi-entry facilities, that is they are used by more than one person entering at a time, but all persons are of the same sex.

A unisex toilet is a single-entry facility, that is a self-contained room complete with toilet and wash basin, with a lockable door that encloses the wash basin. They can only be used by one person entering at a time, but are for the use of individuals of either sex. Unisex stands here for only one of the sexes in the facility at any one time. Disabled toilets for instance are almost always unisex facilities.

The toilets described by the OP meet neither single-sex nor unisex requirements. This is a multi-entry facility that can be used by members of both sexes at the same time, i.e. the sexes mix while using the facility.

Mixed-sex facilities are not what we campaign for in places where we safeguard minors or where the users are especially vulnerable and safeguarding is an issue, such as in hospital wards or prisons.

In all other settings catering to adults, multi-entry mixed-sex facilities would be appropriate as a third space, as long as sufficient numbers of single-sex toilets are also provided.

Language is important here as I'm sure the Safe Schools Alliance Factsheet that was linked to would say.
Single sex: cubicles with sanitary bin. Shared sinks. Closed door to corridor.
Unisex: single contained unit with sanitary bin and sink. Opens to a public corridor.
Mixed sex: cubicles with doors (floor to ceiling) shared sinks. Each cubicle needs to have a sanitary bin.
Are all different, these toilets sound like mixed sex. When communicating always use mixed sex.
I feel your rage and would be just as angry as you.

But yeah, it's all fine really.

Btw: yes, the ideal solution is to add mixed sex to single sex provision, but proportionally. The need for mixed sex is not a majority need by any means.

There will also need to be stringent checks on how many girls in particular are now trying to use how many single sex loos, and that policy and things like distance to get to a loo in time for lessons etc, are not pressuring girls into using mixed sex spaces against their will. Bearing in mind that a hell of a lot of the political lobby agenda by adults in favour of this is training female people out of expecting privacy, dignity and safety and just getting them used to living in a world without it.

Who benefits from this I wonder? Not female people of any age.

My local secondary has done this in the main corridor, 2 blocks of toilets facing each other with back to back basins in the middle, totally open and part of the corridor.

tbh it works quite well for the kids who use them at break time, there are literally hundreds of kids and staff walking within a couple of feet, reducing the risk of bullying and problem behaviour as everyone can see every thing and everyone and it’s really busy.

I also think children are just as likely to get physically or verbally abused by their own sex so single sex spaces are not necessarily safer

[quote OldCrone]Ask to see the Equality Impact Assessment. This is a requirement in Wales.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/assessing-impact-and-equality-duty-guide-listed-public-authorities-wales[/quote]
It is a requirement.

However it's the Welsh government who not only explained to a MNetter's FOI request that they'd lost a very major equality impact assessment, which definitely existed, and definitely had formed the basis of all planning, but they'd gone and lost all the emails relating to the assessment, all the commissioning information and letters/emails on who had been asked to carry it out, and all the minutes from the meetings where the assessment was planned, fed back on and acted on as the basis of decisions made. Every last trace lost. Apparently. Just like it never existed.

And their response to this was 'oh well'.

Remember the old days where there were ethics, integrity, actual sense of public responsibility and you weren't surrounded by people with their pants on fire?

Got = fit

Back to the OP my DC's school is like this, single enclosed cubicles with sinks outside along the corridor. She doesn't use them when at school, but I get no more than "I just don't" when asked. They were built like this 11 years ago so is not a new development. I imagine that they must somehow got within the law.

Ask to see the Equality Impact Assessment. This is a requirement in Wales.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/assessing-impact-and-equality-duty-guide-listed-public-authorities-wales

Has there been some radical change in behaviour of adolescent males since I was at school?

Don't know your age, but these days they have phones with cameras.

Does it need spelling out?

However in this day and age if those spaces are going to be protected then unisex spaces need to be created along side single sex

In a school. No. Kids need adults to set the boundaries and keep them safe and to make decisions they won't necessarily like or understand at the time in order to protect them. Kids need protecting from themselves sometimes.

However in this day and age if those spaces are going to be protected then unisex spaces need to be created along side single sex.

I don't see how this means that women and girls are missing out.
As I said before I thought this was the solution most level headed people wanted to see.

The solution the school previously had, by the sound of it, was a majority of single-sex toilets with two mixed-sex ones. That sounds like plenty.

Nope. Same as it ever was. I have a son at this school, so "I'm alright jack" but I can't get my head around the idea that at the extremes it means that menstruating just turned 11 year old (Year 7) girls are sharing the same space with essentially fully grown 18 year old men.
Of course in reality the 11 year old girl will just walk further to the single sex loos..until those are removed too.

I’d also be asking if the teachers toilets have also been changed “to move with the times” or do they still have the luxury of single sex loos.

move with the times

Has there been some radical change in behaviour of adolescent males since I was at school?

Exactly the same thing happening at my son's schools.

No consultation with parents. The only comms sent out were a paragraph in a newsletter 3 days before they broke up for the summer.

Apparently they did consult the pupils (who were all wildly excited for it) I pointed out that unless it was an anonymous consultation and everyone was asked, it was worthless.

Same format, cubicles with toilets, communal sinks, open to the corridoor. It is being converted from a single sex (boys and girls) block not in addition to the existing provision, but other single sex provision remains elsewhere.
Almost like there is a centralised plan and funding coming from somewhere.

I challenged it on the basis of part 2:

SPRs Regulation 4 — (1) Subject to paragraph (3), suitable toilet and washing
facilities must be provided for the sole use of pupils.
(2) Separate toilet facilities for boys and girls aged 8 years or over must be provided except where the toilet facility is provided in a room that can be secured from the inside and that is intended for use by one pupil at a time.

but was told that because there is single sex provision elsewhere this criteria was met.

I said I didn't think that was the spirit of the law, but fair enough and asked the head, if he could reassure me that there would be no further erosion of single sex provision, (that any new mixed sex facilities would be in addition to not in place of single sex toilets) and was told no, that couldn't be promised.

How does this head get to such a position? Does he actually have any common sense or intelligence?? Can he think for himself?? Does he have the capacity for critical thinking or empathy?

I despair.

I assume you understand the difference between creating unisex spaces and converting existing single-sex spaces to unisex?