Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 19 20 21 ··· 39 40

Original poster

Would you leave your baby unattended in their buggy

999 replies

noblegiraffe · 20/08/2013 13:17

...while you use the loo?

On another thread I mentioned not being able to get a buggy into a small cubicle and the suggestion was to leave baby outside.

Would I be overly precious in thinking 'No, I wouldn't do that'?

OP posts:

curlew · 21/08/2013 16:21

"Curlew. Damage to the buggy. Theft of or from the buggy. If you leave your child in the buggy then other children poking and prodding. Those that are happy to coo and crow over your nanny and stick their dirty fingers on your child. These are just a few.

People keep harping on about abdication, is a possibility no matter how small but those are other things are more likely."

Well, theft won't happen- unless you have been impossibly unlucky in your choice of random stranger. And the rest? In the 60 seconds it takes to pee? Really?

curlew · 21/08/2013 16:22

And I know you mean abduction, not abdication, but I can't dismiss an image of the Duchess of Cambridge risk assessing her trips out with little George.............

littlemisswise · 21/08/2013 16:23

You don't know that you have never caused anyone pain or discomfort by making them wait to use the disabled toilet ilovemyself.

You can all keep telling us how hard it is to pull your Knicks down with one hand, manage a wriggly baby, cope with a pushchair, and all the other crap you keep coming out with, but get this into your head's please, because it is getting really, really frigging boring now, it is a damn sight harder being disabled or having a disabled child. Those toilets you nip in are to make it possible for us to actually leave our houses, Y'know!

CoteDAzur · 21/08/2013 16:23

"Cote I have never been to a disabled toilet that isn't unisex"

And I have only twice seen unisex disabled toilets - at airports. Where I live, there is one inside the women's area and (I assume) another in the men's.

"The probability of a child being abducted while it's mother urinates in a public toilet within sight or sound of the child is minute."

Agreed. But not impossible.

"The probability of my OH soiling himself because a parent has decided to use the disabled toilet so they can fit their pram in the cubicle is much higher."

The probability of your OH ever finding himself in any toilet I've ever been to is zero. The probability of not just any disabled person but one with severe incontinence issues needing to go to the toilet at that exact instant is negligible.

Even if so when you look at consequences (the other component of risk), your OH soiling himself would be unpleasant, embarrassing, and troublesome. A baby being abducted, as I'm sure we can agree, is far far worse.

Anyway, this isn't about whose worry is more justified. When disabled toilets have changing facilities in them, it means they are not only for the disabled. There isn't much you can say to argue against this, although I'm sure some will try.

Ilovemyself · 21/08/2013 16:25

Just to muddy the waters further, my step father is registered disabled as he cannot walk far without his feet and ankles becoming unbearably painful. He does not have restricted movement in any other way.

Does that make him fine to use the disabled loo?

littlemisswise · 21/08/2013 16:28

No, Cote, it means they are for changing babies not a free for all to use.

It was the worst thing companies, planners, etc ever did putting the baby changing table in the disabled toilet in my opinion.

BlehPukeVomit · 21/08/2013 16:29

So NOBODY has found a single case in the UK where a child has been abducted from a public loo when their Mum or Dad has been having a pee.

Not one single case!

Comparisons with the McCannes (sp?) case are truly ridiculous.

If you don't want to leave your DC outside the loo door because you are worried they will get upset or because you are worried your pram or shopping will get nicked then don't but it is a bit silly to be worried about abduction.

CoteDAzur · 21/08/2013 16:29

In short, live and let live.

olidusUrsus · 21/08/2013 16:33

Cote

When disabled toilets have changing facilities in them, it means they are not only for the disabled. There isn't much you can say to argue against this, although I'm sure some will try.

Read my last post. This is not an issue.

Not sure why you have a bee in your bonnet about unisex toilets. I don't give a shit what the toilet arrangements are like where you live. In the UK disabled loos are separate and unisex and there is usually only one: that is the situation my posts apply to.

CoteDAzur · 21/08/2013 16:33

Bleh - I don't have to know of cases where wallets have been stolen from under a towel on a sunbed to avoid leaving my wallet behind me.

There are many cases of opportunistic abductions around the world. It doesn't matter exactly where they take place. You just don't want to provide the opportunity, especially if you can avoid it (and you always can avoid leaving your baby unattended).

olidusUrsus · 21/08/2013 16:35

Yy to "No, Cote, it means they are for changing babies not a free for all to use."

And of course he can, Ilovemyself. There is no measure for disability. Not every disabled person is given a blue badge or a neon sign. If you have trouble using a normal toilet due to a medical condition or a disability (temporary or permanent) you are entitled to use disabled toilets.

CoteDAzur · 21/08/2013 16:37

If people going into the disabled toilets to change babies' nappies is not an issue for you, then there is no problem, is there?

Do you realise that changing a nappy takes a lot longer than a quick pee?

A disabled person using the disabled toilet also takes a lot longer than an able-bodied person going for a quick pee.

If you cannot possibly wait for the 30 seconds a quick pee takes, how on earth do you wait for a nappy change? Or a disabled person in a wheelchair using the facilities?

Genuine question.

olidusUrsus · 21/08/2013 16:41

If people going into the disabled toilets to change babies' nappies is not an issue for you, then there is no problem, is there?

The disabled toilets issue was brought up originally by those who use them without the need for changing facilities, because they were worried about the items from their pram being stolen (not necessarily because they were worried about their baby being abducted).

If you cannot possibly wait for the 30 seconds a quick pee takes, how on earth do you wait for a nappy change? Or a disabled person in a wheelchair using the facilities?

To be blunt: he shits himself. But we deal with it because the person before us had a right to be using the toilet. It is not ok for him to sit in his own mess because someone was too inconsiderate to use a normal toilet, or too worried about their shopping to leave their pram (with or without child strapped into it, whatever) outside of a cubicle.

Ilovemyself · 21/08/2013 16:44

Curlew. It will take me more than 30 seconds as I can use the urinal and normally there is enough space there to keep the buggy in view!

Littlemisswise. YOU are getting boring now. Firstly, if you had read what I had said I have 3 under 16 months.

I can make an assessment of the situation and if I am
Not going to inconvenience a disabled person there is absolutely NO reason why I shouldn't use it.

Emulythornsbff is so right with her last post.

As always, people always treat these issues as black and white when there are hundreds of different possibilities.

What you are really suggesting is that I do not care about those whose needs are greater than mine. Which is utter bullshit.

Dawndonnaagain · 21/08/2013 16:44

If you cannot possibly wait for the 30 seconds a quick pee takes, how on earth do you wait for a nappy change? Or a disabled person in a wheelchair using the facilities?
You dash off to find the next nearest one. I've said a million times, my dd can't wait, and when she does have an accident, usually because some bone idle sod is in the disabled loo, then it causes her embarrassment and pain.

olidusUrsus · 21/08/2013 16:46

Yy Dawn. But apparently she and others don't matter, because it's only a bit of wee or poo and so what

candycoatedwaterdrops · 21/08/2013 17:16

My heart breaks for all the poor parents confused about how they can manage their toileting needs and their child. Oh wait, no it doesn't....my heart hurts for Dawndonna's DD and others like her. Do none of you remember being 16?? It's awkward enough being a teenager without the worry of pissing yourself! And no, waiting for another disabled person is NOT the same, that's unavoidable whereas waiting for an entitled mum with a buggy is not avoidable.

racmun · 21/08/2013 17:16

Isn't the whole point that they are public loo's and there is no guarantee, regardless of your continence issues, that the cubicle will be immediately available to you, another disabled person could be in there.

On the basis it apparently only takes 30 seconds to use the loo I don't feel bad using it and taking ds in with me. Obviously if there was disabled person and I went to use the loo at the same time I would let them go first.

Regardless of how minute the risks are perceived to be re abduction, its just not a risk I feel happy with.

I actually know someone who's handbag was stolen off the hook in the toilet cubicle, the thief reached over and took it. By the time my friend had got out the cubicle the thief and bag had gone vanished. In theory your baby could be snatched.
No onlookers stopped the thief of anything. Who's to say anyone would intervene with a child? As I said not a risk I'd be happy taking.

VisualiseAHorse · 21/08/2013 17:21

I would just go in, pull buggy in behind me and pee with the door open.

morethanpotatoprints · 21/08/2013 17:22

Bleh

I wonder how many people who have had their children abducted, were thinking oh I'll leave my dc here, they'll likely be kidnapped?
That's the whole point, it does happen on rare occasions and because it is rare nobody ever thinks it will happen to them.
It is up to others what they do of course, but I know I couldn't live with myself if I allowed it to happen to one of my dc.

girliefriend · 21/08/2013 17:24

I have done this on occasions when dd was for example asleep in the buggy and I have been desperate for the loo.

I felt anxious doing it but would always be able to see the wheels of the buggy under the loo door, plus I live in a small town which rightly or wrongly feels very safe. I prob wouldn't if i lived in London for example.

curlew · 21/08/2013 17:24

I suspect there has never been a single case in the UK of a child being abducted in the circumstances you suggest. Not one single case.

curlew · 21/08/2013 17:26

"I actually know someone who's handbag was stolen off the hook in the toilet cubicle, the thief reached over and took it. By the time my friend had got out the cubicle the thief and bag had gone vanished. In theory your baby could be snatched."

That is just such a daft analogy. There we opportunist bag snatcher everywhere. That's what bag snatchers are- opportunist.

pumpkinsweetie · 21/08/2013 17:31

Visualise !

Those that are saying they would be quite happy to leave their children outside the cubicle, would you also leave your child/ren outside a shop? Because both are equally the same.
A small risk, any risk that is avoidable is not worth taking re my precious children.

morethanpotatoprints · 21/08/2013 17:38

curlew

I suspect there hasn't either... But sure as hell glad that one of mine wasn't the first.
It may never happen and there are probably hundreds/thousands of other places a child will never be taken from too.
Does that mean parents just leave their dc on their own as its never happened before.
What a ridiculous comment.

Flip

1 2 ··· 19 20 21 ··· 39 40

Swipe left for the next trending thread