To be annoyed at being told to be considerate of disabled people

[DefendingPan]

This sign was in the disabled toilet in a restaurant (which is also the only baby change in the restaurant).

What’s the point of this sign? What might parents be doing that they will stop after reading this?

ok, lts put it bluntly for you.

1 toilet with wheelchair adaptations and a baby change.

if its the choice between me, as an adult, pissing myself in public, and then having to try and get home in piss soaked clothes, and clean a piss soaked wheelchair, and your baby having to spend 5 more minutes in a pissy nappy, then yes, my need trumps theirs.

Don't like it, fucking tough shit.

I've worked with disabled adults for many years and had to use disabled toilets to change them. But I can still see that babies have the right/need to be changed too. A mum alone with a pram and young baby plus toddler may not be able to fit in a standard cubicle. If the establishment is putting baby changing facilities in the accessible toilet then the mum/baby has the right to use them. Mum's shouldn't have to go outside to change their babies or be expected to change them at a restaurant table or leave their baby in a soiled nappy. Sometimes we have to share and queue. There are lots of different reasons why someone may need to use the accessible toilet. If someone in any toilet queue was desperate I would let them go first, young children included.

Nope. Me neither. Parents aren’t asking for priority.

Nowhere on this thread has anyone suggesting changing a baby takes precedence over a disabled person.

You go first, I’ll use it when you’ve finished if there’s nowhere else suitable.

👏🏻 totally agree. I’ve said multiple times on this thread that changing a child should not take precedence. Not arguing at all and have not once made a comment to suggest otherwise. I’ve just acknowledged they do need to be changed and should not be expected to leave a venue and find alternative means as has been suggested.

It’s sad and degrading that we have to resort to being blunt and telling it like it is in such terms to try to get people to understand. You’re braver than me !!

You may need to read your comments back because they have very much suggested otherwise!

God, it's always a race to the bottom, isn't it?

i'm lucky that i have a good group of disabled friends, and we're ALL sick of it, i do a lot of disabled advocacy within my social group.. help arrange conventions and stuff and sometimes have to get blunt with the others over venue choices.. a lot of abled people just DON'T get it.

I dislike being blunt/crude, but its so often that people who haven't been where we are just don't have to think like us. I'm the first in my family to have needed wheelchairs/crutches and things, and the stuff i experience day to day surprises them. One of my best friends recently has also ended up needing mobility aids and i have been by her side through her medical journey and been blunt with her doctors on her behalf (and her husband tbh) and even she cried and apologised because even though she spent a lot of time with me, she didn't get it either until she found herself there.

i dont see it as degrading to have to be blunt, sometimes nicely nicely doesn't work, and a lump hammer is needed to hammer a point home.

I wish I had a group of fellow disabled friends you’re lucky! I’m isolated

@sirzy - here are a few quotes of mine.

“That is a totally fair POV re prioritising needs.

I can hand on heart say I’ve never queued for a disabled toilet. I’ve only ever nipped into one if it’s free and available for use

Nobody is saying they should take precedence. That is an entirely different matter.

I would never see a disabled person struggle in place of my own need

they are not asking for priority,”

Ive said if explicitly on multiple occasions. Perhaps you are the one who ought to read back.

Well that's very kind of you but there are too many people who in practice do not give precedence to disabled people needing to use the facilities which are supposed to be dedicated to them. They don't ask for priority; they just take it. I don't want to just rely on people's goodwill when in so many cases it is not there.

You think we should be grateful that the non-disabled gracefully allow us to access disabled facilities that they muscled in on in the first place? If there are to be any concessions made they should all be the other way round; ie if a parent wants to use the disabled loo then they can be allowed as an exception.

@WinterBones you and I have something in common then as as I’ve said upthread I’ve used disabled facilities in a caring capacity aswell as a parent.

which are supposed to be dedicated to them.

If that’s the only place the baby change is they’re not dedicated, are they? You might think they ought to be, and you might be right and justified in saying that but in the absence of dedicated changing facilities surely you can see parents use them out of necessity and not choice.

Parenthood isn't always a conscious choice.. that's a bit of an illusion isn't it.
I'm not disagreeing with any of your other points but I do think you stand to hurt people if you act like parenthood is just a lifestyle some people decide to buy in the store or something..
It's a biological reality. It's a fact of life. And children grown to be adults.. they are part of the general population. You make it sound a bit like these are pets we are talking about.
I don't think it's a hood idea to defend the rights of one group by acting like another group is less important.. that's going to get people's backs massively up. And it's not thar I think 'disabled people should be more polite' about talking about their rights.. it's just that I do think it's important to have compassion.
Obviously disabled toilets should be used by people with disabilities who need them... but it is not the fault or responsibility of parents trying to meet the needs of their children, that some businesses try abd save space and money by lobbing the only changing unit in to the disabled cubicle. This is something both groups should be taking up with these business not each other.
Children do not have a choice regarding being born and they also have a right to access public spaces and be out and about without having to sit in their own excrement because the only place to change them is in a toilet they aren't supposed to be in.
But you know I don't think whether someone chose or did not choose to have whatever need they have is relevant at all to any of this.
Businesses should take more care and we should all be campaigning that changing facilities aren't just exclusively lobbed in the disabled loo

we know, and i certainly have no problem with them being used for changing babies.. as i said, i am unlikely to BE that urgent that i can't let a mom go ahead of me (unless i've already had to traipse for ages to find a loo).

what we object to is people being 'offended' by the signs asking for consideration, by leaving it in a mess, by taking the piss and then using the toilet themselves, for their other 2/3 kids who ARE old enough to use the normal bathroom, for tying the cord up and not putting it back, using it for breastfeeding, as a changing room..etc

There have been enough examples on this thread of JUST that kind of behaviour. THAT is what needs to stop while our bathroom is also being used as a baby change.

I have never seen a sign like that before, but I am assuming it is because some parents have left the place in a mess, left the changing table down, nappies on the floor etc. that has made it difficult for a disabled person to use the facility properly.

It is difficult when the baby change and disabled are in the same cubicles, but some places simply do not have the room to have separate cubicles for both.

You seem to assume here that disabled people aren't also parents? FWIW I agree it is stupid to have the only baby change in the disabled loo.....have already said that above.

No I don't 'surely see' that parents ever have to use a disabled loo 'out of necessity' to the extent that disabled people should be denied access to their facilities....I disagree with this entirely. Just for the record: I once posted in detail about what my DS personal care entailed, and MN put a trigger warning on the thread. So no I don't accept that a baby change ever trumps the needs of disabled adults, it is frankly laughable to suggest they do.

I'd say thats rare.. if you've got the space for a separate disabled cubicle you've probably got the space to put a changing table somewhere else. I've seen many tiny cafes manage that..
In fact most of the places I've seen where they have put the changing table only in the disabled loo have been bars where they could have definitely made the women's toilets bigger ti accommodate a changing table but they have chosen not to because it's just cheaper to put them in the disabled cubicle which they had to build by law.
These places should be held to account really coz it's literally just about money.

I did not say they trump the needs of a disabled person. Just that they are needs, not choices.
Businesses shouldn't be putting these needs into competition with each other.

I have not said i do not agree “that parents ever have to use a disabled loo 'out of necessity' to the extent that disabled people should be denied access to their facilities”

nor have I suggested that

a “baby change ever trumps the needs of disabled adults“

So I’m not sure why you have quoted me and made those statements.

I agree with that and agree that needs should not be put into competition with each other and ideally, all needs should be catered for. Combining the only baby change with the disabled toilet is stupid and shouldn't be acceptable.

But it is disabled people who fought for these facilities in the first place.....not parents. Disabled toilets are for disabled people, the clue is the wheelchair symbol on the door.

👏🏻

I agree only because my daughter has allergies, and when she does a poo you need to change it straight away. Otherwise, she'll get a sore bum to the point it bleeds. If I couldn't take her anywhere else, I wouldn't let them in front

You stated that 'the attitudes on this thread seem to be that parents should put their needs aside on principle, as though that would someone strength a disabled persons entitlement to such facilities.'

This suggests that there is parity of need and that individuals just need to be considerate and agree whose need should have precedence. I am arguing that there should not be any such debate; the disabled facilities are for the disabled. If occasionally non-disabled people wish to use them it should be a very occasional exception only.

Any poster that suggests that non-disabled people are entitled to use disabled facilities provided they 'need' them enough is advocating for barriers to access for the disabled. However considerate individuals may think they are, that is what happens in practice. If parents want better facilities then they should lobby for them as the disabled lobbied for theirs.

The sentiment behind my comment was that children shouldn’t go unchanged or stay in soiled nappies for fear of using dual purpose spaces.