Not Really AIBU but amusing twist on old favourite: Disabled/Baby Change Loos

[QueenSconetta]

I know its quite a regular topic here, and I myself have moaned complained whined discussed parents using a disabled toilets with their children.

The other day I was a supermarket in a different town and was quite amused to see all the old ladies going into the baby change room cos it was big enough to fit their trollies in! I did wonder how they got on with using the mini toilet though

One can never win this one me thinks.

Saintly, a family room is just that, I would just see you and your DS as a family like mine, I wouldn't bat an eyelid.

Anyone who would think otherwise is a dick.

hidetheelephant

If i can take my child into the ordinary loos I will. When he was young enough and if he was having a 'coping' day he would come in with me. I actually occasionally would take him and DD into the loos with me at the same time. It was a juggle but if I can manage i do.
Because it is nice to just go out and be ordinary if you can

Are you under the impression that people with disabilities would rather use the diasabled loo as a point of principal?

Because they mostly don't.
I think we don't want to use anything we don't NEED to.

For example Ds2 can get priority baording on most airline but he actually manages queuing for a plane well ( we don't know why) - so we queue with everyone else.

I am really struggling to understand why this seems to be so difficult

Lily, thats the problem people use the disabled toilet, so they have no need to lobby for a family room, using the disabled toilet is easier than having to lobby!

Its only a temporary measure, as you yourself have said your children have grown and it is no longer a problem for you, so why should you lobby (not suggesting you did use the disabled toilet or accusing you of anything).

Children are not in pushchairs, nappies etc forever, so most people dont feel the need to fight for something, when the disabled toilet will do for now. Unfortunately the disabled children/adults who do need to use the facilities will never grow out of it, they NEED these facilities.

I find it annoying that there seems to be an increasing trend to put the baby changing facilities into the disabled which are then only accessible with a radar key.
This means that the baby changing facilities aren't actually accessible.
My 2mo DS had an explosive poo (in a sling) and I had to spend 20mins finding a security guard to open the toilet.
The abled bodied toilet was a single, very dirty cubicle and there was no space even to put him on the floor.
I have no objection to the disabled loos being locked but then they shouldn't put the baby facilities in there too. Very annoying.

Does anyone know the detail of the disability legislation?

I suspect that if people lobbied for family facilities, most providers would simply stick a "family room" sign to add to the babychange and disabled sign on the existing facility.

Unless someone comes along and says that this is against the legislation.

Claw, that's why I think perhaps it could be something that something like MN could lobby for - because they ALWAYS have members who would benefit from family facilities (and not just sticking a pushchair sign on the door of the disabled toilet).

Sullwah, it basically boils down to the individual business to make 'reasonable adjustments'. Most disabled toilets do not meet the recommended requirements for disabled people.

'reasonable adjustments' for a small business, would not be the same as a large business.

So disabled toilets already double up as changing facilities, pushchair room, family rooms, people with luggage etc, etc.

and until 'normal' people start complaining about these facilities being inadequate, as disabled people have been for years, its not ever likely to change.

As you have seen from this thread, lots of people use these facilities as a temporary measure, so really dont give a shit.

Lily, in theory that is a good idea, but as with every campaign you need people to back you. As you have seen from this thread, the majority really dont care. (although i appreciate there have been a few decent human beings on here too)

The majority of the people who would back any campaign would be disabled people or people affected directly by a disability.

The self-righteousness of some people on this thread is incredible.

I have never come across people like this in real life.

Thank Goodness!

I would back a campaign for better disabled facilities. Disablity can affect anyone at any point- just because I'm lucky enough not be personally affected by disability now doesn't mean that will always be the case does it?

There but for the Grace of God go I.

Hidetheelephant - to answer your question about '..people who have wheelchairs in their life every day..' - I am not in this position, but I am a trained nurse, and on the wards I often had to take someone to the loo in a wheelchair, so feel I can offer some insight here.

The issue is not just a child of the opposite sex to the carer and using the disabled loo so as not to have (say) a boy in the Ladies. The main issue is having enough room for the wheelchair, and enough room to transfer the person from the wheelchair to the toilet. I cannot think of many public toilets I use where there is room around the cubicles for a wheelchair, without causing an obstruction.

Secondly, most ordinary cubicles are too small to allow the disabled person to be transfered onto the loo easily - and it is very important that this is as easy as possible for the carer, because if they damage their back, it is going to make looking after their disabled child/relative even harder.

HTH

Supercherry here disabled people already have a campaign

Its not disabled people who need to campaign for better facilities, its the 'normal' people who are using the disabled facilities who need to campaign for family rooms, baby changing facilities etc, etc iyswim.

But if businesses just need to make a "reasonable adjustment" then any campaign for family facilities is just going to result in the invention of a new "family room" sign which will be glued to the door of the disabled facility together with the baby change sign.

ie it will result in formalising what already happens on a more casual basis.

Only large institutions like John Lewis etc can afford (or have the space) for a multitude of different toilet facilities.

Can't we just all use some common sense?

claw I aggree, the parents who can't leave thier kiddis for a second need to campaing, how do you think disabled stuff cam about.

You could divide the mens toilets, which are rarely used to capacity, and use the other half for family facilities.

Sullwah, 'Reasonable adjustments' is a very loose term. The disabled toilets, where family rooms do not exist, are already family rooms because smaller businesses even if they have the room can get away it. If there is a NEED, it has to taken into account.

The more people complain, the more it becomes a need.

As you have seen from this thread, common sense isnt a strong point for some.

Can I ask a question? If you are someone that uses the disabled loos for their proper purpose, and a business (say a cafe) had space for 2 rooms, what would be better - 2 dual purpose facilities or 1 family room and 1 disabled?

(though I must say I am liking the idea of putting the family room where the men's toilet is. Men's toilets always look huge and empty to me.)

Lily, disabled people already have disabled toilets, albeit inadequate. Disabled people are already campaigning to get better facilities.

If non-disabled people were also to campaign about the inadequate facilities that they have for baby changing, not enough room for prams, queues too long etc, etc. But most wont, because they can use the disability facilities with the only inconvenience being for disabled people, not them.

The "reasonable adjustments" bit of the law becomes "proportional adjustments" from October.

The courts gave a very strong message in November 2009 when considering the case of a wheelchair user who wanted to use his bank branch and go to their counter. It's a listed historic building so no ramp for wheelchairs. The bank said no, but were willing to let him use another accessible branch, or internet banking, or have someone talk to him in some accessible place. He refused. He took them to court. He won. The court told the bank to pay for adapting their building even if it meant losing a meeting room, and awarded him compensation.

The law just got much tougher, in other words. Even if places reason that it would cost a huge sum to adapt things. Even if the building is historic and Listed. Even if there are alternatives available.

Interesting case...
with many ramifications for business, who up until now have thought that they are exempt from the disability laws.

I agree Claw, that's what I've been saying, but I think realistically that it would have to be an 'organisation' that campaigned for them, because firstly, as you rightly say, it is a transient inconvenience for mothers (though not at the moment when the toddler needs a BIG POO MUMMY!!!!), and as I said further down, something like MN has a constant membership of people with buggies etc.

The issue of it benefiting disabled people is not that they should have to campaign for facilities. Rather that if we're being realistic, it is much better that the disabled toilet is ACTUALLY available when needed by someone with a disability, rather than it being SUPPOSED to be free, but actually not. And judging by this thread, the only way that will happen is if there are facilities that parents with buggies can use. Shouldn't be that way, but it may be that that is the case. You could lock all the disabled toilets, but could then end up with the situation of a disabled person who hasn't got a key for whatever reason being unable to access the toilet at all.

Note. I am not saying disabled people should campaign for family facilities. I think it would be something that MN could campaign for, that would have wide reaching benefits, both for the people that the facility would be aimed at, and the people who are currently inconvenienced by their facility being abused.

I have 2 children who have disabilities and 3 that don't.
In the city in which i live there is no disabled toilets that i can actually use to change my daughter as i require a hoist (i did participate a while back in the changing places campaign).
I am having baby number 6 shortly (having just finished potty training my 2 year old toddler).
I often find baby changing facilities are a bit rubbish but have never campaigned about them because and this is just my feeling and its because my babies and toddlers are only babies and toddlers for a relatively short period of time imo before they gain bladder control and can walk. Where as my daughter who is quadriplegic will always be quadriplegic and i often feel a bit that it can be so difficult to have a full day out with her due to often No suitable disabled changing facilities for her within miles. Unlike a toddler i can't take her back to the car to change her or ask her to crouch on a disposable potty thing somewhere discreetly behind me if needs must.

I often don't use disabled loo's with my daughter just because i can't. I usually take some wipes and a change of clothes out with me for my 2 year old should we get caught out and i have used baby changing facilities that were inside the disabled loo's if one of my children has had a particulary awful nappy. On the occasion i've come out to find someone waiting i have always apologised (and have always been as quick as i'm able). I think it's just common sense and courtesey at the end of the day.
When my toddlers been desperate i have either taken them to another shops loo or asked hopefully if anyone would mind if she pushed in 'cos she was desperate and said i'd be very greatful, but often i have had a potty under the pushchair anyway and have found a discreet place to use it. I think i'm quite fortunate though as my toddler rarely gets to the point she is so desperate as to cause an issue. If people only used disabled loo's with their baby/toddler when the situation REALLY called for it then i should doubt it would happen often enough to cause a real problem,it's only when people use the disabled loo 'cos they think if disabled people shouldn't have to wait then they shouldnt either that i'd have an issue with.

I do understand the issues with having a learning disabled child because I have one. I take DS to the normal loos with me cos he is young enough to come in the ladies. He has had issues with queing but luckily it's not happened in the toilet so far although he's only recently toilet trained so there is time yet I suppose.

Why is no one answering my questions though. People with learning disabled children might think it's OK to use the disabled loo cos their child doesn't like crowds, or hand driers or queing, but I want to know if people with wheelchairs think this is OK.

I answered your question about smaller children in wheelchairs, hidetheelephant - did you not see that??

I think most wheelchair users confronted with a learning disabled child who has a blue badge and receives higher rate DLA care and mobility are going to understand the need for a disabled toilet in that case. Especially if they have to use carers themselves.

Not every child with LD's is going to have to use the disabled loo. If they do then I can't see why it matters. People with wheelchairs don't have precedence over disabled access. If they did try to do something like qualify exactly what type of disabilities were sufficient for the disabled toilet then my son and others like him would still qualify as he has a blue badge.

Incidentally the council has registered him on some disability list and have put his category down as 'mobility' although he has no physical problems walking. I assume they've done that as he qualifies for the register through the blue badge or something.

Sorry Seth, had to go out.

1 Disabled facilities and 1 family family room.