to use the disabled toilet in this situation?

[dolldaggabuzzbuzz]

I took mine and my sister's DCs for a nice day out to the cinema. There was just me and 4 kids aged between 3 and 5. After we bought our tickets I took them to the Ladies toilet, they were all engaged and there were a few people waiting.

I decided not to wait and took the DCs out to the disabled toilet as there was no one using or waiting for it. When we had all finished we were washing our hands when someone tried the door, one of the DCs had unlocked it and this woman in a wheelchair came in with her partner, I said I won't be a minute. She glared at me and muttered some things.

I was really embarrassed that I had been caught out using the disabled toilet and I wanted to apologise to the lady for keeping her waiting (for less than a minute!) but she was really, really angry. The DCs ran out in opposite directions and I quickly said sorry to the lady and as I walked off she screamed "Bitch!" at me. I never turned back to look at her. I don't think the DCs noticed anything!

I was so upset I couldn't get it out of my head throughout the film, and it ruined my day. I don't think what I did was that bad. I thought that woman was really horrible. AIBU?

I don't buy into this argument that we should be grateful for our able bodies

Did you actually mean to say that 'out loud?' !

[applauds Pagwatch]

Rita - what is so ridiculous about the suggestion that you carry two babies if the pram is such a bind? Or that you could use the toilet with a child on your back? One of the major draws of slings for me is NOT being stuck in these situations. I have always managed to wee in a perfectly satisfactory manner with a child on my back - he is now 21 months and I am still managing it - because using the loo doesn't generally involved lying down flat.

I have also done the nursery run more than once with 2 babies in slings - it isn't practical for massive distances (although my friend managed a mile walk with about 40lb of baby and toddler recently).

The point that is being made is that there are solutions to every problem and plenty of us manage so that it never becomes a problem in the first place. If you don't want to use any of those solutions then that is a matter for you but then you really should accept that you are making a choice and putting your needs before those of others.

I think most of the sniping at Gemsy is because the people she is disagreeing with know damn well that there is absolutely no justification for what they are choosing to do and are shouting louder to try to distract from that. Ironic that she is being given such grief for her posts when another, very vociferous poster on this thread has called her names and also called another poster a "cock". No-one has pulled him up on it, I notice. I also take issue with the poster who said that people might have come round to her point of view if she had posted differently. Rubbish - I was saying the same things, as were another couple of posters - but people were too busy getting involved in a slanging match to actually pick up on any of the points we raised and discuss them reasonably.

I agree with Pagwatch - the bottom line is that most people just don't care about other people as long as they are not inconvenienced. I would have a bit more respect for those people if they just came out and said "you know what, my needs come first and everyone else can just damn well wait".

Oh and bunny you can have disabled parking bay - just as long as you have my disability as well. Doesn't seem quite so attractive now does it?

you know don't you that by 'misuse' they mean shooting up etc in the loos and thats why some have a radar key? its often to do with whether there are security guards around or not.

some places only have one loo. costa where i am only has one loo and its disabled style. does this mean i may not pee at all in costa?

It's very ironic

I agree, Pag. It makes me very sad that so many people are saying that their convenience is more important than the needs of disabled people.

And to all those saying that disabled toilets are never busy - that is as it should be. So that if and when a person with a disability needs to use it, it is available.

If we all merrily use the disabled loo then it will constantly be engaged.

Is that so difficult to understand?

I think that Pag put it well. If you need to use the loo because of your personal circumstances, then that is fine. But don't try and excuse yourself with flimsy explanations.

sungirltan
don't be ridiculous. Of course we are talking about toilets where there are many loos and one of them is an accessible one.

All these "what if" questions are a bit silly, to be honest. I don't for one solitary moment believe that the posters on this thread are so lacking in all common sense that they cannot perform a basic mental exercise that goes something like:

1. Is the disabled toilet the only toilet available? If yes then use, if no then proceed to 2.

2. Is the baby change in the disabled toilet? If yes then proceed to change baby, if no then proceed to 3

3. Do I have a disability/medical emergency/child with disability/child with medical emergency? If yes then use, if no then proceed to 4

4. Is this the right, fair and courteous thing to do? If yes, then crack on, if no then take a good hard look at yourself.

And in reality takes about a milisecond to work out.

It would be ridiculous to transfer two children from pram to slings in order to pee, so as not to momentarily inconvenience a hypothetical disabled person

[strokes MmeLindt soothingly]

Not sure I have ever seen you tell anyone to fuck off before.

[reminds self to stay on MmeLindt's good side]

RitaMorgan Wed 06-Apr-11 21:55:32
It would be ridiculous to transfer two children from pram to slings in order to pee, so as not to momentarily inconvenience a hypothetical disabled person

No. You just don't want to.

I don't want to, and I couldn't as I didn't have two slings with me.

Thanks Kungfu, as usual you are spot on. But hey if they are bashing me they are leaving some other bugger alone!

Kungfu
I don't do it very often, but these kind of threads rile me.

Fwiw, I would not expect a mother of twins to put her babies into slings in order to avoid using a disabled toilets - if it were impossible for her to take the buggy into the ladies loos and leave it outside the cubicles.

Rita I expect 99% of the population wouldn't want to hold 2 babies while they are trying to do a pee.

kungfupannda well said

Kungfu
Can we have a chart with that printed? For every door of every disabled loo in the world.

It would only be necessary to transfer one child, just hold the other. And it would only be necessary once in a blue moon when you couldn't fit into the toilet any other way, that is if you don't use slings as a matter of course or at home. And only for a very limited time of course until the babies can walk. And then you won't have to use a pushchair anyway.

It's definitely one end of the convenience spectrum but it's certainly possible and fine, and I would imagien something to bear in mind as you do limit yourself considerably choosing a large pushchair.

"Fwiw, I would not expect a mother of twins to put her babies into slings in order to avoid using a disabled toilets - if it were impossible for her to take the buggy into the ladies loos and leave it outside the cubicles."

No, I have to say I wouldn't be tutting at a mum of twins using a free disabled loo if there really was no other option at hand. But if everyone applied some common sense and there wasn't an assumption that the second you sprout a child and a buggy you are incapable of coping with any remotely inconvenient situation, then no doubt everyone would be entirely accepting of, for example, a mum of twins making occasional use of a disabled toilet. There wouldn't be that sense of "oh yes, here's another one who thinks she shouldn't have to wait".

However, I stand by what I say about there being options and it being entirely an individual choice whether or not to use those options. I manage, my friend manages, several other people I know manage. If someone wants the convenience and not to put themselves out then it would be nice if they held their hands up and said "yes, I know I shouldn't but it was a bloody nightmare so I did it as a one off" rather than "well, I am ENTITLED to do it".

Like I said to you earlier though Altinkum- what if the lady in the wheelchair also had a hidden disability as well as her obvious one- which made her use abusive langauge, i.e tourettes/learning difficulty?

BUT THE OP DIDN'T HAVE SN, NOR DID THE CHILDREN WITH HER
she was just using the toilet as it was easier. that is all.
so the oh but she might have had sn is crap
"they were all engaged and there were a few people waiting"
that is why she used it, cos she couldn't be arsed to wait.
so every one says that the lady in the wheelchair was rude, but how long was the "less than a minute" really, and who knows what disability the lady kept waiting had, maybe one that caused her pain.
yes she was rude, but the op was selfish.

YANBU. You had a fair enough reason to use a bigger toilet. The lady was wrong to have sworn - after all, you were just finishing.
Lots of people have to use disabled loos who don't use wheelchairs.
I have used disabled loos before because (TMI time, sorry) i regularly get IBS with really bad cramps. So if that happens i have to get to any nearest loo asap or it's very painful. Many women have continence issues due to childbirth or disability. Then there are those who need to empty stoma or catheter bags. And the very obese who don't fit normal cubicles. Then there are old grannies whose family have to help them. Etc.

God Gensy I agree with kungfu too! I am just trying to say that if I venture into a disabled toilet many would look and think lazy cow just let that toddler walk and carry the baby into a cubicle. Everyone's needs aren't always obvious, try not to judge or be critical. We're not all blatantly disregarding the needs of people with disabilities.