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.

Just want to pick up on a point someone made pages back. They said you can tell most users of disabled toilets don't need to use them as they apologise when they come out. I always apologise when I come out of the toilet if someone us waiting (and if people bump into me). I don't have anything to apologise for but it us sort of an instinctive reaction.

I use accessible toilets only if I know I or a child won't make it to the normal ones without having an accident. I think this is a very legitimate use. If I can make it to the normal loos (including queuing) I will.

Or on the table in the restaurant.

Bilberry, i do the same, i think its just a british thing
Ime, the twats dont apologise!

Red, i honestly dont know what to say to you.

Point taken, ArcheryAnnie, but let's face it, 99% of parents with prams using the accessible loos are only using them to prevent their £800 pram being taken

I do understand your frustration, BerniceBroadside, but how do you know this? If you'd seen me coming out of the loo, you'd assume I was one of the 99% as I don't look as if I have any problems - no cane or anything. It's true that perhaps most people with a buggy will be fine (and don't need the accessible loos), but I'd suggest that there's a higher proportion of mobility or bladder problems in women who have small babies than the general population - C-sections, SPD, incontinence, etc, are all very common. I had existing joint problems which buggered up my mobility before I got pregnant, but I also had SPD and a botched c-section, so am hyper aware that these can really mess you up, too. Women who haven't experienced these problems during pregnancy can get a bit "pregnancy isn't a disability, ffs", when, seriously, for some of us it really, really is, or it can exacerbate conditions we already have. For most women this will be a very temporary thing, if they are lucky, but in the meantime they still need to pee.

(And my buggy was the smallest and cheapest I could get, both for weight reasons and because I was skint, but I wouldn't care if it had been stolen. But there's no way I'd have left my kid outside without me.)

Now I've no longer got the buggy, I still look fine. Almost all the time I use the regular non-accessible loos, but when I'm somewhere where those loos are on an upper floor or in the basement (very common), I will use the ground floor accessible ones if I can't tackle the stairs.

I wouldn't use it. Unless I had the pram with me

Beyond I think you're missing the point though - it's one thing to complain that able-bodies people should have the courtesy to consider the needs of disabled users, and leave the accessible loo free as far as possible (or not to use it when it is a disabled-only loo). Bit it's clear that there is no single policy relating to accessible loos - some places they are multi-use, some places they are not, some places they are treated like a normal loo that happens to be accessible, etc., so it isn't like there is one clear social code for using them or not. If what would be desirable for disabled people is clear legislation restricting the use of accessible loos, then that's one thing. In the absence of that, I don't see how it's useful to fulminate against the users of accessible loos when they are so often multi-use anyway. And I do live somewhere with lots of accessible facilities: they just are multi-use accessible facilities. If that's not adequate, it isn't the users' fault, but the designers and planners and legislators.

ArcheryAnnie, may I introduce you to RedToothBrush and her mates...

I wouldn't say anything, because I don't have invisible disability spotting superpowers, but given the responses on this and every other thread on this subject I think we can safely assume that the vast majority are able to use alternative facilities.

I'm not going to avoid using the disabled toilet with the baby change station because its been given dual purpose. nobody on this thread has said you should avoid the baby change/disabled toilets

Yeah I'll do it in the middle of the floor in the ladies instead then. as I have to do with 4 and half year old ds sometimes if we can't get into the disabled toilet. I also have to change him on the floor of said disabled toilet, as they are so badly designed (oh yes design geniuses, let's put the baby change facilities in the disabled toilet, but no facilities suitable for changing older children or adults - great)

That's what I'm saying, Bernice - it isn't a safe assumption at all.

Well it is, because plenty have admitted to it on this thread and others.

I had to use an accessible loo once to throw up. I would have gone to the ladies but the queue was out the door (St Pancras station anyone??) and I didn't have that much time to think about it! It was the accessible loo or the floor.

The looks I got when I came back out anyone would have thought I'd just murdered a basket of kittens in full view of all the kids going on the Eurostar. I was already, unsurprisingly, feeling pretty rotten and that didn't help. For the record, I don't make a habit of using them!

Unfortunately the only real answer to this is to ask people to a) be understanding and tolerant of each other, and b) don't exploit that decency for your own laziness. You can't quiz people as to their need as they go in or come out. My neighbour, before she passed away, had bowel cancer and a colostomy bag. She was perfectly sprightly, very glamourous!, and unless you knew her you wouldn't see anything wrong! I know she got a mouthful at least once for daring to use the disabled facilities

I use accessible toilets when I need to empty my mooncup. They tend to have sinks in the cubicle which makes it easier to rinse it out and wash my hands without leaving bloody fingerprints all over the door handles and toilet flush.

So where does that fit in to the should I/shouldn't I use the accessible loo equation?

Slightly off topic, but sometimes I wonder what people do in toilets to take so long. Surely everyone can't be going for a dump, and a wee takes 30s. On occasion I've taken my two kids into an accessible toilet and all three of us have peed and washed out hands while the queue for 10 ladies loos hasn't moved...

OH FFS!! NOT AGAIN! AND, YES, I AM SHOUTING. [GRIN]
If you are not disabled... You. Do. Not. Need. To. Use. The. Accessible. Toilets. You can wait, really you can.

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'm not highlighting this ^^ to have a go at this PP, but it's an attitude I've seen on here quite a few time. When did all these previously capable women become rendered so in capable, just by having children?! I have 2.5 years between DS and DD, so have done my time trekking up and down stairs, on and off public transport in and out of small spaces. If you are an otherwise physically able adult, it's really not that hard. . Honestly, it's not.

Aaargh, feeling so stabby, I F'd up my

And I've posted here, too, Bernice. Your safe assumption would be wrong about me, and others who haven't posted here.

Off the point a bit but what are you supposed to do when a supermarket closes the women's toilets for maintenance/repair and DIRECTS you to use the disabled toilet. That happened in Morrisons this week.

I absolutely agree that everybody should be more considerate of people with disabilities and just generally actually, if somebody has a need that you don't, why not make life a bit easier? I don't ever think it's helpful to rail at people on a thread though, name-calling. How is that ever going to help?

You don't need to use it to empty your moon cup it's just more convenient for you.

This is the whole problem. If one person uses to wash her moon cup, another to throw up in, another because she's bursting, another to take her two dc in, another because she's in a rush, these all add up.

What about the person with a disability? The child who doesn't understand why he/she has to wait for people mentioned above.

If you are able bodied queue up in the toilets meant for you.

Perhaps they all have lifts installed in their homes? How else would a physically able mother carry a non walking baby upstairs? Or do they demand the councils houses them in a bungalow, because they're a mother now, don't you know!

Honestly, the mind boggles at not being able to carry a baby (or toddler) up a flight of stairs.

I work at a craft shop. We are not required to provide toilets for customers, and many of the shops around us (retail park) don't have them. But we do. On a very small site, there is room for a staff cubicle (non accessible) and a multi use cubicle. Accessible and baby change.

If this one cubicle was not good enough because non disabled people should not be using it, what should the conclusion be? Surely one is better than none, even if it's shared? I can't see that the use of accessible toilets can be legislated for.

To be fair I think using a disabled loo to be sick in isn't like using it to empty your moon cup.

I cannot believe someone has just tried to justify emptying a moon cup and this being equal to using the accessible loo as a disabled person. Fucking hell.

I do have a list installed in my home, in that I live in a flat with a lift. When I didn't have access to a lift, I was effectively housebound when my DS was small, unless I had someone to help me. I can do the stairs now (though I pay for it afterwards, which is why I avoid them if possible).

And even if this wasn't true, an empty stair in my own home would be very different to a crowded stair somewhere else.

Thread moved on while I was slowly typing!

That was in reply to planet

Archery, you have an invisible disability, I dont think the q about lifts was aimed at you :)

And i understand wholeheartedly where you are coming from, but i would have thought you'd be angrier at those who abuse the facilities rather than questioning those who are annoyed at people without an obvious need using them. If people didnt take advantage and only used them for disabilities/emergencies, noone would give you evils and assume you were also taking the piss?

I'd never say anything to anyone in RL, I'd assume they did have an invisible condition. But the people on this thread show that sometimes an able bodied person just doesnt want to chance carrying their baby up some stairs.

Exactly Planetwaves, I think some people are confusing this toilet thing with disabled parking issues. You (generally) aren't allowed to use disabled parking spaces in England unless you have a blue badge which is fair enough. However just because toilets have the same disability symbol on them doesn't mean they are only for disabled people. The symbol is used universally to show accessibilty for disabled people for eg at National Trust properties.

Our local library only has one toilet and it has the symbol on the door. I'm sure that does not mean 'fuck off somewhere else if you're not disabled', it just ensures that disabled people know that the toilet is accessible to them.

When I questioned an employee at a local cinema about using the disabled toilet with my desperate dd he said it was fine to use it, it was just a toilet that was designed to be used by all.

I think it's all about consideration. I let anyone who is really desperate or is with a desperate young child go in front of me all the time. Surely disabled people do the same? If you were not desperate you'd surely let them go in the disabled toilet in front of you?

OP I don't think you WBU to politely decline to use it (I wouldn't either unless I was about to wet myself), I do think you WBU to want to correct her because I don't think she was wrong.

Beyond, this is true - but that's akin to what I get all the time from people who know what my condition is: "you are allowed to use it, but all those other cunts are taking a liberty". Which, since for people who don't realise I have a problem then I'm the cunt who is taking a liberty, makes me very sympathetic to all those other cunts who may be seen as taking a liberty, too, but aren't.

As it were.