To ask Aquarium to put a radar lock on the disabled toilet

[Worrysaboutalot]

We went to a large aquarium centre today for DC2’s birthday. It was very busy with many families enjoying the centre. We had a great day out

As I am in a wheelchair, I have no choice in which bathroom I can use, I had to use the disabled toilet.

I had to wait until a mother and a couple of younger kids came out of the disabled toilet which surprised me. As it looked unlikely that any of the younger kids would need nappies.

Then I went in this was a dedicated disabled (not accessible) toilet with no baby change facilities! I do understand that the first mother might have an invisible disability, as might her children. So thought no more on it.

All the time I was in, the door handle was being rattled and I kept calling out that the toilet was occupied, which was frustrating.
When I left and an impatient mother with a pram was waiting to go in. I told her that there was no nappy changing facilities in that toilet, assuming she wanting to change the baby. But she snapped at me that she was a mother and had to use this toilet gesturing to the pram.

I felt that this second mother was just entitled and rude. Having a pram doesn’t entitle you to use a disabled toilet. Use the end toilet in the women’s bathroom, with the door open and the pram in the toilet doorway, like everyone else does.

Years ago, I had 4 kids under 6yo at one stage and I never used the disability toilets, except for the baby changing ones for baby changing purposes.

Therefore, AIBU to have asked the aquarium centre to add a radar lock to the bathroom. AS this was the ONLY disabled toilet, and the baby change facilities were separate. To increase the likelihood of ringfencing these limited facilities for those who actually need them, rather than those people who want to use them.

@Winemewhynot

I’m sure by the time we’ve campaigned for more pram friendly facilities and the government accepts and implements the policy our babies will be strapping teeenagers!

So in the meantime I will continue to use the facilities that are accessible to me and my child to ensure we are able to toilet safely and with dignity, whether that be the ladies, accessible or family cubicles.

Selfish as fuck.

You might not need family toilets in years to come but other parents will. Your own children will most likely need them for your grandchildren. But who cares when you can keep using the accessible toilets that were campaigned for, by disabled people, 30 odd years ago?

And this is the problem. Parents are lucky they only face the problem for a couple of years so happily jump on the result of other groups hard work campaigning and as a result makes it harder for everyone who needs to know those facilties are available for their whole life

Exactly this. I took a friend to the London aquarium, the only accessible toilet there is also the baby change. There was someone in there changing a baby, however the mum also decided to feed the baby in there with Dad too- I realised this after I knocked at the door. They refused to vacate to let my friend use the toilet.

My friend had an accident and we had to leave which was humiliating and could have been avoided.

Neither the London aquarium or the parents gave a shit.

So selfish.

@FergusSings

I think that illustrates the problem with places doubling up a disabled loo with a baby change facility. The two need to be separate provisions IMO.

I think it’s also the problem with selfish and entitled parents, they did not need to stay in there to feed the baby, prioritising that over someone who has a permanent disability urgently needing the toilet.
But they saw it as ‘their’ space.
I did complain to the aquarium and this was a while ago, they really did not care.

Definitely need to be separate provisions.

@FergusSings

If it’s an accessible baby change and also a disabled toilet it IS their space as well as yours.

I personally would have vacated and waited to feed my baby until after the person had used the toilet but they were entitled to be there and you don’t know what they were dealing with at that moment. The problem there is with there being only one toilet.

It’s bad that the aquarium had nothing to say about that though, as it is a problem they have really caused through their lack of pre-planning and common sense. I would expect them to be apologetic and promise to pass it on to someone but some big businesses don’t really care for people’s feedback.

I'm sorry you had difficulties here but it is absolutely not okay to expect women to use the toilet with the door open.

In the country where I live, accessible toilets have signs on the door stating who's entitled to use them. People who have to bring a pram inside are clearly included.

@FergusSings

I think it’s also the problem with selfish and entitled parents, they did not need to stay in there to feed the baby, prioritising that over someone who has a permanent disability urgently needing the toilet. But they saw it as ‘their’ space. I did complain to the aquarium and this was a while ago, they really did not care.

Well the "selfish and entitled" parents (who by the way had every right to be there if it's a baby change as well - not their fault that's the set up), wouldn't even be in there in the first place if the provisions were separate. Problem solved.

Reading through this thread, I agree with you on just about everything, @Kanaloa. I find myself nodding at many of your comments.

I say that as a person who has been a carer of sorts for a person with dementia, a person who has an invisible disability but chooses not to use the disabled loo, and as a person who has friends who do have visible disabilities and have sometimes been less than understanding about people with invisible ones.

The fact of the matter is, more accessible lavatories are needed. I don't necessarily think it's that people are more selfish now. I think it's that with the rise in awareness of invisible disabilities, more technically able bodied people with disabilities are now using the facilities that ten years ago wpuld have been seen as solely for wheelchair users. No one says that they're wrong to do this. However, demand has far exceeded supply.

[quote Kanaloa]@FergusSings

If it’s an accessible baby change and also a disabled toilet it IS their space as well as yours.

I personally would have vacated and waited to feed my baby until after the person had used the toilet but they were entitled to be there and you don’t know what they were dealing with at that moment. The problem there is with there being only one toilet.[/quote]

Exactly. The problem is that it is set up as a shared space in the first place.

Yeah. You can’t have a shared baby change and disabled toilet then be surprised someone with a baby is in there. As I say I would have allowed someone desperate for the toilet to go in and stopped feeding but when you have a small baby you might be all over the place, especially if you’re struggling to breastfeed. If it’s the only space set up then it’s unfair that it’s shared but it isn’t the mum’s fault, it’s the fault of the business/designers of the building.

Sorry, that was @sofiegiraffe. Just agreeing basically.

"Well the "selfish and entitled" parents (who by the way had every right to be there if it's a baby change as well - not their fault that's the set up), wouldn't even be in there in the first place if the provisions were separate. Problem solved."

They were selfish to feed their baby in there. It is not hard to think of the difficulties they would create for others by doing that.

@Sleepyblueocean

"Well the "selfish and entitled" parents (who by the way had every right to be there if it's a baby change as well - not their fault that's the set up), wouldn't even be in there in the first place if the provisions were separate. Problem solved."

They were selfish to feed their baby in there. It is not hard to think of the difficulties they would create for others by doing that.

Were they selfish? Or were they dealing with their own difficulties at that moment in time with a new baby, and using the allocated space provided for them? As per @Kanaloa's comments, I would have also vacated and allowed the other person to use the loo before changing / feeding my baby. But I'm not going to judge what that other parent was dealing with at that moment in time. Whatever judgements you want to make, they weren't wrong to be in a space set up for parents to attend to babies.

@TheFairyCaravan

Yeah so selfish to not want to leave my child unattended or piss in public. How dare I think I have a right to privacy and safety? How entitled to use an accessible toilet when told to by staff. I’m having a wee not taking up official residency there 🙄🙄🙄

[quote Winemewhynot]@TheFairyCaravan

Yeah so selfish to not want to leave my child unattended or piss in public. How dare I think I have a right to privacy and safety? How entitled to use an accessible toilet when told to by staff. I’m having a wee not taking up official residency there 🙄🙄🙄[/quote]

The word "entitled" has been thrown about and IMO overused (and misused) on this thread. There is nothing entitled about needing to use a toilet in a dignified and private manner whilst keeping your infant child safely beside you.

All posters are doing here is highlighting the issue caused by families once again deciding that the disabled facilties are a free for all.

They are limited enough as it is. In the vast majority of cases they aren’t fit for purpose anyway. If we keep the attitude of “oh it doesn’t matter who uses them” then all you are doing is making it harder and harder for those who are disabled to go out.

The disabled community have been campaigning for years for their facilties. They are still campaigning. But now they are supposed to also campaign for better parent and child facilties just so they can access what little has been allocated to them.

"Were they selfish?"

Yes. They could have fed the baby somewhere else. I can't change my 15 year old disabled son somewhere else. So he is left sitting in poo and eventually getting distressed and having a violent meltdown about it which is upsetting for everyone around him. Whatever their entitlement to be there was they were showing no consideration for those who had no choice but to use that room.

@sofiegiraffe so true, but it’s appears to be the favourite word of some on this thread to describe a mother acting in her child’s best interests

I’m sure we wouldn’t be ‘entitled’ if our child got snatched from the public bathrooms or we were assaulted by a male in female whilst urinating in public, I’m sure they’d be full of empathy for us then and there’d be a public outcry of why the hell weren’t they using the accessible toilet 🙄

.

[quote Winemewhynot]@sofiegiraffe so true, but it’s appears to be the favourite word of some on this thread to describe a mother acting in her child’s best interests

I’m sure we wouldn’t be ‘entitled’ if our child got snatched from the public bathrooms or we were assaulted by a male in female whilst urinating in public, I’m sure they’d be full of empathy for us then and there’d be a public outcry of why the hell weren’t they using the accessible toilet 🙄[/quote]
Exactly 🙄

[quote Winemewhynot]@sofiegiraffe so true, but it’s appears to be the favourite word of some on this thread to describe a mother acting in her child’s best interests

I’m sure we wouldn’t be ‘entitled’ if our child got snatched from the public bathrooms or we were assaulted by a male in female whilst urinating in public, I’m sure they’d be full of empathy for us then and there’d be a public outcry of why the hell weren’t they using the accessible toilet 🙄[/quote]
"Male in female"? Are you referring to trans women using female bathrooms? If so you do see how ironic it is that you seem to feel that spaces women have fought for are being used by a non female whilst advocating using spaces the disabled have fought for by non disabled?

If we keep the attitude of “oh it doesn’t matter who uses them” then all you are doing is making it harder and harder for those who are disabled to go out.

Except not one person has said "it doesn't matter who uses them". We've said that at present a lot of places offer no private and safe alternative for lone parents with prams. This proportion of people are using the only viable option (and being told to by staff on premises of which we've seen numerous examples). Some also double up as a changing facility (wrongly, IMO). That's not quite same as saying "it doesn't matter who uses them".