Wasn't allowed to use disabled toilet despite the fact no other toilet was available. AIBU?

[fakenamefornow]

Seaside town with beach that stretches about 1.5 miles away from town centre with just flats and houses facing beach, ie no pubs or cafés that might let me use the toilet. It's about 10am rainy January morning, nobody else about apart from about two/three people and dogs on the beach.
Half way along on seafront is a public toilet block. Both mens and womens shuttered up and locked. Disabled toilet, locked, had a phone number to call for remote access so they could let people in. Called number and despite me pleading that I was desperate for the loo (I was) and pointing out no others available, I was refused absolutely point blank access because I wasn't disabled.
I don't think this is fair at all, but what do others think?
YANBU - she should have let you in.
YABU - no way should she have let you in regardless of how much you needed the loo.

I have to say I think I would have just peed beside a wall or similar as men so often do.

But I think they should have let the OP use it. I think the key thing is that there ought to have been mens and women’s toilets in that vicinity which were unexpectedly out of service. So the service that should have been available was not available - I think that is the difference between this and just letting any old person use any CP toilet.

Walking any distance when you’re busting is agony.

I agree there should be many more disabled toilets and facilities like CP for those who need them. But the fact there aren’t doesn’t mean that the OP should have been left in discomfort.

Some people seem to be missing the point: the changing places facility wasn’t ‘open’ either.

If OP wants to blame someone then she needs to ask the council why they close the public toilets during the winter.

If she thinks she may ‘get caught short’ then wear continence products (that’s what they were designed for). My adult son has to wear nappies because he’s doubly incontinent.

Imagine she’d wanted a buy a sandwich from the cafe but it was closed. However, the Michelin star restaurant next door was open, would she insist they make a sandwich for her for a couple of quid and then get shitty when they said no?

I’m glad so many of you never have the need to use a changing places facility. Our lives are hard enough as it is without finding the CP hoist hasn’t been put on charge or the bench broken, because anyone has been allowed to use the toilet.

Tell the authorities that!

So similar scenario, mother and child parking at supermarkets, someone without a child parks in one leaving parents with a child unable to use them. Just because a parent with child hasn't arrived at that point doesn't mean its a free for all.

Yes. Had the Changing Places toilet been locked with a key, that would have been the end of that.

This with bells on.

Er, yes it does. Parent and child parking spaces are advisory which means they should be left for those with children, but if there’s nowhere else to park they can be used by anyone. And parents themselves abuse them - if the child isn’t leaving the car, they shouldn’t be used.

Yes. CP toilets are not designed for this purpose. They are not even accessible to all disabled people - they are specifically designed for those with severe disability who need a carer in with them or have to use the specific equipment provided.They have to be cleaned and checked after every use to make sure equipment is in place and properly charged.

So direct question, direct answer. No. OP is not entitled to use them, and yes, the choice for OP on this occasion was to walk five minutes further on to where facilities were open, pee ‘in the wild’ or wet herself. This is just one more example non disabled people feeling entitled to appropriate a disability provision never meant for them.

The use of accessible toilets isn’t linked to benefit entitlement or diagnosed disability - they are designed for anyone who needs them. Changing Places toilets are not accessible toilets and not interchangeable as such. They are reserved for those more severely disabled who need a carer to help, or need to use the specific equipment provided. So your argument doesn’t stand.

Local authorities have no jurisdiction in this area
This scenario isn’t imbedded as a right in building regs or the EA

I agree with all of your points.

However, just needing a piss isn't a reason to use an accessible toilet.

As I said, there would have been other toilets around she could have used.

Sure, piss in my garden... My dog does it so if that's what floats your boat?

😵‍💫

"They have to be cleaned and checked after every use to make sure equipment is in place and properly charged."

That won't happen unless it is in a private facility. All the ones we use are in public places with radar key access.

I saw on LinkedIn yesterday that a Bill has been tabled in Ireland to require businesses to allow disabled people to use their toilets.

Question is - what counts as a disability?

Or build more accessible loos - even better.

In the OP's case I don't think there were.

So people have to wild wee? I can just imagine what the pearl clutchers of MN would make of that!

There's a big difference between buying a sandwich and going to the loo!

However, I take the point that the CP loos are a special category.

This.🙄

I admit I am that pearl clutcher 😂 would love to do lots of walking but lack of facilities stops me

A business opportunity
😁

You don't think there were because that's what OP said. I'm betting there was somewhere she could have went.

When did I say she had to "wild wee"? Is that the only other option?

My DH once told me his grandmother used a "She wee" (I had no idea what it was until then! 😂) That would be an acceptable alternative, no? 😉

(That was a joke for those that won't get that).