Banging on the door of the Accessible Toilet

[HunterHearstHelmsley]

Why do people do this?!

I've just used the accessible toilet (I need to use the accessible toilet). I'd barely sat down and someone started banging on the door. I wasn't in there an unreasonable amount of time - probably about 30 seconds when the door banging started and 3 minutes overall. I was in there because I needed to be, banging on the door isn't going to make me quicker. If someone was taking the piss, it'd probably make them stay longer!

It's not the first time it's happened but it's so frustrating. It happened a few weeks ago also, that time was a woman wanting to use the baby change... the baby change wasn't even in the accessible loo!

It's really annoyed me this morning, it's not something I've noticed when using non-accesible toilets so I think it's just an accessible loo thing. But whyyyy?! I can't go faster 😩

Yep, agree. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and to have their say on a pubic forum. I’m disabled myself, have been all my life, so I understand the challenges and I’m just as entitled to my opinion as anyone else. And you, and everyone else on this thread are just as entitled to either agree or disagree with it. That’s the beauty of free speech.

Could that have been a child? They are often taken to accessible ones when the parent has pushchair, bike, etc

So much ignorance about hidden disability. My condition doesn't make me walk differently or look different, it doesn't even cause me pain. It doesn't mean I don't need a space. It causes profound weakness that gets worse throughout the day. To the point if I over do it I can't lift my head or arms off the bed or even speak. So you don't get to judge a hidden disability based on a snapshot in time

Simply stating facts as you see them isn’t ignorant. I also have a hidden disability and before I was confined to a wheelchair I was challenged numerous times when using disabled concessions because my condition wasn’t obvious . I don’t have a problem with it either - as long as the challenge is polite, relevant and not intrusive. If, as disabled people - regardless of whether the disability is hidden or not - we don’t challenge when we think we have reason, then we risk the further erosion of resources meant for our use. We all know that that these resources - accessible spaces, blue badge parking, etc, - are open to widespread abuse. So if you aren’t open to the suggestion that it’s up to us to challenge in order to protect these resources, what do you think the solution should be ?

I think the comments about disabled parking spaces are valid and I really don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that if someone can jump out of a car with no difficulty and run in four inch heels, then whatever hidden disability they may have is not impacting their mobility at that present time, so it’s really not appropriate for them to be taking up a space which someone else may be genuinely in need of. This is basic common sense. More and more, blue badges seem to be issued with no consideration of whether the specific qualifying disability actually impacts mobility, and at the same time disabled parking in town and city centres is becoming harder to access. There seems to be a correlation between the two, and only on MN is it considered judgmental or ignorant to suggest that.

They shouldn’t be.

Good for you that you didn’t mind being challenged. Lots of people would mind very much and it is intrusive.

It is absolutely not ok to question anyone’s health unless you’re their medical professional.

It’s not down to random strangers to question someone’s need. Unless it’s your job then it’s nothing to do with you.

someone questioning ds on his needs would probably stop him wanting to go to that place, or out at all.

being disabled is tough enough without people passing judgment about if they are disabled enough.

Blue badges are tough to get. If someone has one it is because they have proven to people that they need it. You can’t decide they don’t just because of how they look.

I really don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that if someone can jump out of a car with no difficulty and run in four inch heels, then whatever hidden disability they may have is not impacting their mobility at that present time, so it’s really not appropriate for them to be taking up a space which someone else may be genuinely in need of

With my disability, I can run into a shop wearing heels. It takes a couple of minutes for my spinal nerves to be pinched to the point I'm in agony and can only hobble back to my car. So stuff you and your "at the present time" nonsense.

Nice. Common sense is out of the window, so the abusers just carry on because PC behaviour dictates that you can’t reasonably challenge people for fear of causing offence. OK then. This thread is batshit.

But what gives you the right to challenge people? Why do you think you’re so superior you can pass judgement?

What does confronting achieve? If you’re so inclined check their blue badge when they’ve gone. An arsehole who’s not entitled is probably just going to ignore you anyway and there’s disabled people that don’t want to be confronted, I don’t want to tell a stranger what my problems are.

Interesting turn to the thread. Why do you think this is about anyone feeling superior or passing judgment ? I agree absolutely that no one has the right to demand the details of anyone’s disability, but I think all disabled people have the right to challenge someone’s use of accessible facilities if they think they have a reason to. It’s been said numerous times that no-one is suggesting that we demand the intimate details of someone’s condition - just a quick ‘do you know that’s an accessible facility for the disabled’ or something similar will suffice and if the answer comes back affirmative then that’s the end of it.

The poster was right when they said that these resources are finite and becoming harder to access. If we’ve got to the point where we think it’s better to allow people who are not entitled to use these resources to continue to abuse them, than challenge something we see as not right, then the abuse will continue and as always it’s the genuinely disabled who will be at the receiving end - as evidenced by some of the experiences recounted here. So ID cards maybe ? Locked facilities and the key issued only to those who are identified in some way, as eligible to use them ?

I think in the case of blue badges the problem lies not in the lack of spaces available, but the wholesale abuse of the concession. My local supermarket has blue badge spaces right along the front window up to the entrance of the shop. Having had a quick scan one day on my way in I was shocked to find that only a couple of the cars parked there were actually displaying the badge. Clearly no one checks and it’s supposed to be an attendant car park. None of this is down to those with hidden disabilities - it’s down to those who abuse. Unfortunately in some cases it’s difficult to tell one from the other, so if we can’t challenge for fear of causing offence we just continue in the same vane - circling round and round until we find a space and keeping quiet. It’s difficult.

Surely you wouldn't run into a shop with heels on then? That would only increase the speed at which the nerves get pinched.

It would be extremely annoying to have to carry an id card or fanny around finding someone to give you the key… why the fuck should we have to just because some people are selfish wankers?

I thought that. This thread just gets crazier. Surely if you can run in heels you shouldn’t be taking up a disabled space. But I don’t think we’re allowed to say that for fear of causing offence to those with hidden disabilities who can do this, but still exercise their right to the space because they have the badge.

Exactly. So if challenging isn’t reasonable because of hidden disability, then we have to put up with the abuse and accept that sometimes there’s going to be shit on the floor because some selfish wanker is taking up space in the toilet we so desperately need !!

Exactly. I genuinely avoided going places for a bit because it is so excruciating being judged just because people can't "see" my disability.

I know others with the same condition who use a stick more to fend off judgement than anything else.

I'd love to use a wheelchair but my arms are even weaker than my legs.

What constitutes a reasonable challenge and why do you think you have the right to do so? You’re using a very extreme example. However, maybe they’re using the badge to collect someone.

I can’t run but I’ve had people like you think it’s ok to say things such as “this is a disabled space” what do you want me to say that?! I’m not going to say “yes I’m disabled”. It’s none of your business but feel free to report me to the supermarket security and they can ask me. I don’t owe people any explanation.

Could you maybe use an electric chair? Mine is brilliant.

Exactly. I am in a group for people with my particular condition. It's essentially invisible (although a trained neurologist or optician might spot the signs) and it fluctuates so can be very unpredictable.

It's horrible seeing how stressed people get about being judged. It's a really debilitating and isolating condition. We can rapidly lose our ability to move/see /speak/swallow/breathe.

We don't need idiots querying our right to use a space /toilet. Its isolating and scary enough without a fellow disabled person judging us

I really want one, but I don't know how to afford one. I also couldn't afford to fit it in my car (I have a tiny car). I essentially use my car as my mobility aid.

If you have a valid disabled badge displayed you don’t need to explain yourself. At all. But with the best will in the world, look at things from the point of view of someone who is severely limited in mobility driving round and round the car park waiting for a space, and then seeing someone jump out of a car parked in a disabled bay. Wearing high heels and running. Are you seriously suggesting that it wouldn’t cross your mind to at least ask why they are in that space. That poster didn’t elaborate on whether there was a valid badge displayed and it may have been she was picking someone else up, but I can see how it would be frustrating.

Are you eligible for motability because they lease electric chairs in the same way as the cars. Only thing is you can’t do both at the same time so if your car is a scheme vehicle you can’t do a wheelchair too. Have a look at ebay because there are some brilliant second hand and reconditioned electric chairs on there, far cheaper than from the retailers.

I changed my behaviour today as a result of this thread. I'm about 15 weeks post major orthopaedic surgery after which I was initially in a wheelchair, now on crutches. I had a bad experience getting stuck in a normal toilet after a previous operation so this time I have been using disabled facilities without giving it much thought. However, reading some of the posts on here made me feel a bit guilty and I acknowledge that now I am not in a wheelchair I don't have an absolute need for the disabled facilities so I could use the regular ladies loos at the shopping centre today. And I did so successfully, thus proving that I don't actually need the disabled facilities. It was a right pain though, both literally and metaphorically. 3 doors to negotiate each way in and out of the cubicle instead of one. Quite a large room with, on this occasion a recently mopped floor. No wash basin in the cubicle of course so unwashed hands into crutches for me to hop to the basins, then slippy, wet ones to cross to the hand dryers on the opposite wall, and no grab rails or anywhere for me to lean my crutches at any point.
But it was do-able. So I can't claim an absolute need for the disabled loo. No denying that its one door, grab rails, shelf I can lean my crutches on and easily reachable hand basin and dryer would have made my toilet trip quicker, easier and more comfortable though. Am I obliged to have an avoidably unpleasant experience because I don't have the same absolute need for the disabled facilities as a wheelchair user? And where do you draw the line? Someone who walks with a stick? Someone with a stoma? Someone who needs to inject prescribed drugs? They probably all could use regular toilets but their lives are made a bit easier by not having to. Where does need become convenience and who gets to judge that?
Yes, there will always be some piss takers but not everyone who appears to be so actually is, and how can you know? Even "obvious" people might not be. Unless there is some kind of legally enforceable scheme analagous to blue badges for toilets I don't see any viable option other than to let people make their own choice according to their own conscience and assessment of their own needs, which obviously do fluctuate.
For what it's worth, if I am out with another female who can come into the ladies toilets with me and help me with the doors etc then I will use ordinary toilets from now on, but until I can walk unaided, if I am alone I will be sticking to disabled toilets whatever anyone else thinks or says.