to politely decline to use the disabled loo?

[MsIngaFewmarbles]

I was waiting in a long queue for the loo in a coffee chain and saw a lady with crutches head into the disabled toilet. She came out while I was still queueing. Another lady further back in the queue caught my eye and offered for me to go in first. I declined saying that I wasn't disabled so wasn't entitled to use it. She then countered away to her friends telling them that she was going to use it as 'it was the law' that if it wasn't being used you could use it. I couldn't face an argument so just ignored her. It's still bothering me that I should have said something to her and corrected her.

but what if the only toilet available in a place like a restaurant is an accessible toilet?

of course anyone is allowed to use it. It's made to be accessible to include wheelchair users, not so that non-disabled people will be excluded.

which is why terminology is important.
accessible doesn't necessarily mean "disabled only"

I am one of those healthy looking people with a hidden disability- Colostomy bag. I hate the look that some wheelchair users give me when I come out.Using a wheelchair is not the only condition that needs a disabled toilet and some people really do need to remember that. I also think it is quite ridiculous for a toilet to remain empty when there is a queue of 10 people waiting.If people are aware they are using a disabled toilet and are really quick I honestly can't see the problem. If a disabled person turns up obviously they would be next in.

It wasn't the only toilet available though.

If you look at the social model of disability (from which a lot of campaiging for accessible environments stems from) then the aim should be for all toilets to be accessible.

Awareness is what is really needed to make society more accepting of disabled people. And I really do think that just not using 'disabled toilets' is necessarily something to be that smug about.

For example, a really long queue for a toilet would be quite difficult for a blind person with a cane to navigate around. Less of a queue due to people using more toilets would actually also assist in making that environment more accessible to a blind person.

I also wonder how on earth people know 'non-disabled people' are using them. Not all disability is visible.

As their need to use the toilet is equal to the able bodied person and its a accessible toilet.
Funny how the able bodied want equality when it does them a favour but don't think about it the rest of the time. In many cases the need is not the same, no matter what you or anybody else chooses to think. Just because they're both desperate doesn't mean it's the same or equal.

So my question is yet again skirted around and goes unanswered....

Funny how the able bodied want equality when it does them a favour but don't think about it the rest of the time

Nice generalisation there dawn

Practically, if all toilets were made accessible, then this would disadvantage disabled people who needed them urgently. There won't be more toilets with accessible ones as they take up more room- so you would get three, to be used by everyone, rather than two non-accessible and one accessible and mainly free. If what you want is accessible and pretty much easily available all the time for disabled people in urgent need, that is a different thing than accessible for everyone all of the time. Similarly, if accessible also means baby change/accessible for families, this massively slows up availability for disabled people. This needs more thinking through, given that new builds aren't going to start giving over more % to toilets.

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if I am repeating what someone else has said.

I would think the sensible thing to do would be to ask if anyone needs to use the accessible/disabled toilet, and if not then I would use it. yes a person who specifically needs that toilet might come along and that is fine - just because they have additional needs they can still wait can't they? They would have to if wait if it was being occupied by a person it was meant for. As long as before it is used it is offered to any appropriate people then I think creating a queue to leave toilet that no one is using is pointless no?

No they can't always wait.
Is the whole point.

no plum. read the thread, your points have been raised and answered already.

I'll answer your question sarky. As a wheelchair user.

Personally, if someone were absolutely desperate and I could wait, I would tell them to use the accessible toilet. I'd hope they'd been raised with the basic politeness to check I could wait (as i would not have the option to use the next one that became free), otherwise I'd be rather annoyed. And possibly accidentally park my chair in front of the door Because, in this situation, if someone is literally about to shit themselves, I would count that as a temporary disability that required the urgent need of any toilet.

But i would really want them to check, because no matter how desperate they were, if i couldnt wait, as i said above, i dont have the option to use the next regular toilet to become available.

Yes I would say there are pretty much no walls left now!

'just because they have additional needs they can still wait can't they? '

That would depend on the nature of their needs. For example, if a stoma bag is leaking waiting 30 secs can be the difference between being able to carry on with your day or having to go home to change.

Look, it's really not difficult.

if you are not about to soil yourself and have no space requirement for the accessible loos (ridiculous disclaimer that I shouldn't have to make), and you CHOOSE to use them instead of queuing, are you happy to come out, and see that a disabled person has soiled themselves because you made the ONE toilet they can use, busy?

If not, then don't use the damn loo. If you can wait and use a normal loo, then do so.

I'd wager those who can't are probably envious of your good fortune.

I think that if there's a queue for the ladies and you're in a hurry, you should nip into the men's toilet, not the disabled one. Why don't people do that?

I do feel for people who have a non visible disability, the posters on this thread who feel they have to apologise for using a facility they are entitled to use, it's not fair. I wish I hadn't started this thread, some of the responses have made me sad and/or angry.

Yaaaay!!!!! another 'disabled toilet^ thread!!

I bet you couldn't wait to run home and post your tale of toilet abuse.

Not sure about OP, quavers, but you seem pretty excited about your pointless post

Not that it matters but it happened last week and was still irritating me, so I posted.

Toilet abuse is more relevant to some.people than counting rice Krispies, sadly.

No, some disabilities do indeed mean you can't wait like anyone else. Autism can mean that, even for seemingly high functioning people, and continence issues and pelvic floor ones can definitely mean that! Disabilities aren't always apparent to the casual observer, and nor are the ramifications of that disability.

I'm not trying to be daft here, but why does an autistic person need the accessible toilet? They have no clunky equipment that would require a bigger space. They can use the normal cubicles. For hidden disabilities, it's not about needing the stall, it's about needing to cut in line to the first available cubicle, not a specially designed one. A person with EQ would still take priority over an autistic person for that cubicle.

If a disability isn't apparent, the onus is on the person or caretaker to explain that to people in line and ask to go ahead. I can't imagine a single person saying no. I can, but they're a special sort of asshole You need to be your own biggest advocate for your needs.

They even have little cards now for people with Crohns that they can show the people in line.

Nice generalisation there dawn
Erm, no. I've been involved in this thread since the begining. I have been on the parking thread and the buggy on buses thread that was deleted. No generalisations. The facts really do speak for themselves.
Oh, and both dd and I have been involved in a stupid number of these threads for a number of years. I reiterate: No generalisations...