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.

I think you could benefit from seeing a gp about your anxiety seaunicorns :(

To be fair, I have NEVER seen an unattended child in a pushchair anywhere in public, so I would say that Seaunicorn is not alone in wanting to leave a baby unattended outside a public toilet, and it's not always possible to get a buggy into some toilet areas. I don't use disabled toilets myself unless they are the only baby changing facility, and use would never go in one if there was a line or any alternative anyway... but I really don't feel comfortable about babies and young children being left in public areas without adults watching over them and I don't believe this is any more anxious than putting a child in a car seat or using safety latches on windows. If you can bring the child into the ladies and leave them outside the cubicle, then I see no issue... I do this and would leave the latch open, I'm not that worried about another woman potentially catching a flash of my knickers. However, with the double buggy it's not always possible and I would find an ACCESSIBLE toilet in somewhere like Costa or Marks and Spencers (where it is the only toilet or there is a toilet in the baby change room) and only consider alternatives if this option wasn't available.

"idiot pram users clogging up the accessible loos"

Arrrgghhh. Actually I think idiot pram users probably have more sympathy for disabled users than the average person, as they are more aware of the logistics of getting in somewhere.

The issue does not lie with the pram users but designers.

As other people have pointed out, they would not leave their pram unattended for fear of theft which is actually pretty reasonable given the cost of them. They are likely to be uninsured if not locked up (in a similar way to bikes). When was the last time you saw somewhere to lock your pram up near toilets?

A couple of weeks ago, I had the joy of using the Trafford Centre baby change facilities for the first time. Planning was approved in 1996 and it was completed in 1998, so not in the dim distant past before accessibility laws. I was shocked. It had three bays, but there was so little space in there that you could just about fit in two prams, but certainly not three. Which rather defeats the point. There is no where to leave your pram outside. It was mid week during the day, and during that time several people had to go away as there wasn't space in there for them. I dread to think what its like on weekends.

Incidentally I was there last week and went for food with my MIL. I was directed by staff at the restaurant to their disabled toilet which doubled as a baby change. The ladies and gents were upstairs so would have been completely inaccessible and were too small anyway.

So what should I have done in that situation? And what do you do if the baby change facilities are not fit for purpose and there isn't enough of them?

Its not a question of 'idiot pram users' being somehow selfish. Its an issue that shopping centres and supermarkets are being built to produce as much retail space as possible to generate revenue without any thought being given to those who use actually use them. Its more inconvenience rather than a convenience.

Ultimately unless that's legislated for too, then there will always be this problem.

Agree completely with RedToothBrush. Are people seriously suggesting leaving an unattended child in a pram outside the loos instead of taking them into the accessible one? My toddler can get out of her straps and would try to step out of the buggy if not watched, and IMO if you are alone if is NOT reasonable to leave a baby or small child unattended or ask a stranger to look after them. I've only rarely been in that position where I needed the loo and no-one else about and couldn't get the buggy into the ladies, but it has occasionally happened, eg. in shopping centres, car parks etc. Are you seriously suggesting I should have left a baby in a buggy unattended outside some underground car park loos rather than take her into the accessible loo when the place was deserted? :/ Because of the theoretical possibility that someone else might come along and be desperate for the loo whilst I have a quick wee?

I'm baffled by the tone of this thread. In my RL experience most people don't use the accessible loo without a good reason, but occasionally, when in some kind of need, they do. I don't really recognise the world that's depicted here where selfish pram users and so on are loo-blocking others. I can think of hardly any instances where the baby change isn't already in the accessible loo, or where the staff of, eg. a restaurant, don't regard the accessible loo as simply a usable loo that happens to be accessible, and direct customers, eg with small children, to use the accessible loo anyway. Maybe it's because I live in a town with lots of disabled facilities and where the (Labour) council have flight to preserve good public toilet access and to ensure there are lots of facilities about, so it's rarely an issue. But I think it's odd to pretend that accessible loos are the equivalent of wheelchair bus spaces, because in some buildings equalities legislation is fulfilled by making a general loo of all loos accessible, so they are always designed to be multi-use. In those cases (baby change, no other loos etc.), and in unsafe environments where for example it's not possible to leave a baby in a buggy unattended, what are people supposed to do?

*fought not flight

here we go
the omg I can't wee and have a child in a pram.

it isn't a disability
so why use a disabled toilet??
weird how most people manage

DH designs buildings, including retail and sports venues, so I asked him about this when it came up in a previous thread.
He said: the allocation of the total number of toilets based on the total average number of people expected in the venue, and then a percentage of those are made accessible. So the venue managers expect all the toilets to be used, rather than the accessible ones left reserved for people who have an actual need. The exception to this is the RADAR system, but that is less common in privately-owned and fully managed venues like retail

piss and do you think that applies to toilets which are clearly multi-use? Like pretty much every accessible loo/baby change I've seen?

"I dont really recognise the world thats depicted here, where selfish pram users and so on loo-block others"

May I really respectfully suggest that this is because you are not a disabled person who is negatively affected by this?

Planetwaves what do you think??
no I am talking about ones with out baby change stuff in them

Venue managers are rarely disabled people, as are (on a related subject that often shows up here) those designing car parks. Things are rarely designed in the most sensible way to make things easier for disabled people, more to absent-mindedly tick a box on a checklist.

Beyond no, because I cannot think of many if any non-radar key accessible loos in my town which aren't multi-use ones with baby change included. These always seem to be regarded as loos which happen to be accessible rather than the other way about, eg. when they are key locked.

Yes, anyone not disabled should wet themselves if there is one multiuse toilet. Ffs, i think we did that particular straw man about ten pages ago.

Planet, i promise you, as someone who became reliant on a wheelchair "later" in life, I notice a hell of a lot more now it is happening to me than I did before. Theres a shopping centre near me that has fantastic toilets, family rooms with the big toilet, little toilet and a baby change, feeding rooms, mens and ladies both with larger cubicles and their own accessible toilet in each, as well as a load of extra accessible toilets that are neither in male nor female. Pram users still use the accessible (non radar) toilets (without a baby change)

Beyond the shopping centres and supermarkets (and other venues) I use aren't designed like that - so what are people supposed to do? IMO the courtesy of other loo users and the spaces that are actually made available for them are really different things. Much of this thread is obviated if the only accessible loo available is multi-use. Then there's no point fulminating against the users.

Planet, you said you didnt recognise the world portrayed in this thread where people loo-block disabled people as you live somewhere with fab accessible facilities, and now your most recent post seems to contradict this?

My point stands anyway, even with the great facilities near me, people are selfish and take the piss. And i notice a lot more now im the one sat outside in my wheelchair.

I wonder if anyone ever changes their minds on these threads?

Chipping, I would like to think so but sadly I doubt it. So frustrating when you spell it out in words of one syllable and yet and someone just totally disregards it by "not recognising" our experiences.

I really think there's a special place in hell for some people. Would love to loan my chair to some of them for a week.

Incidentally, when I was in the restaurant the other day, I did leave the pram with my MIL and carry DS to the toilet. I was directed to the disabled as that's where the baby change was. I later went upstairs to the ladies on my own. In theory had the baby change been upstairs in the ladies, I could have carried DS as he's only 11 weeks. However when he's bigger that could be a lot more difficult and tbh, having to carry small child up and down stairs in unfamiliar and potentially busy areas poses some interesting health and safety issues particular if you have more than one child with you.

I personally would love to use facilities designed for parent and child and avoid using the disabled facilities where ever possible as now having the pram I am a lot more conscious of issues of accessibility now than I was prior to having DS. However faced with the choices I have and what facilities there are available I have to make decisions that are in the best interests of my child and his safety/well being. I'm not going to stand waiting for 20 mins for a baby change station, if he's obviously in discomfort and screaming his head off if the disabled toilet is vacant for example. I'm not going to avoid using the disabled toilet with the baby change station because its been given dual purpose. I'm not leave my child unattended whilst I take a piss. Nor would I even take my child out of the pram and leave it unchained/unattended because my child's safety/well being is going to be compromised if it gets nicked as I can't afford another easily.

And I fail to see why any of these actions constitute being selfish and I'll challenge anyone who say I am being. Its just the reality of things not being properly considered by the planners.

I don't see it as a competition over who needs these facilities most. Clearly both sets of users need them to varying degrees and they aren't being adequately catered for. I find it a very different thing to the parking issue as I'm very capable of walking further even with a pram. Parent and child spaces are useful but its not going to make my life difficult in any way if they don't exist or are full (even if its full with twatty able bodied Overfinch drivers with no children and an inability to park their car properly).

If anything both sets of users are on the same side with similar needs so I do not see the point in trying to pit one against the other.

Oh absolutely yes, a NT adult, carrying a small NT child up some unfamiliar stairs is EXACTLY the same as a disability, and provision should be made for this immediately.

I give up.

I'm not saying it IS the same. I'm saying that there is a problem here though. You are missing the point.

Dual purpose yes, its lazy planning. But my example i've just given, the parents are choosing not to wait for the facilities designated as theirs, the toilets were not accessible/baby change. They still do it.

When ds2 was little, i'd pretty much always change him on the pram, as i struggled to lift him up to a changing table and stand while i changed him (his pram was doubling as a walking frame at this point as i couldnt transport him if i used my wheelchair). If you have a pram with you, its never impossible to find somewhere to change your child. If you are disabled and someone is in the accessible toilet, you have no choice but to wait.

Sorry, but I wouldn't wait. And you can whinge all you like about it being selfish. I am not using the facilities for my own need I'm using them because my son needs them.

You are being selfish in failing to recognise that others have needs too that are not being catered for, and seem to be intent on making it this competition.

Like I say, its about everyone's needs not being met, and being on the same side about there not being enough facilities available. Unite on the subject rather than getting others backs up by suggesting they are being selfish for wanting to care and meet their child's needs.

You wouldnt wait for a babychanging or family facility (when both are provided), nor take the pram in one of the larger (but not quite wheelchair size) cubicles in the ladies - you would take the pram into an accessible one that does not have a babychange unit? How the hell does that come under "not selfish because its for your sons needs"??

Yeah I'll do it in the middle of the floor in the ladies instead then. Do fuck off.