I know this is a controversial one. Last week I was out and about and stopped for a drink at Starbucks. I also needed the loo. There were two toilets - regular and disabled/mother and baby. I'm heavily pregnant and getting to that point where a sneeze when I need the loo = have to go home to avoid public humiliation. There was no queue but the person who went into the regular loo seemed to be having a bit of a hard time and had spent a looooong time in there. The disabled was free but I didn't use it. Eventually someone walked past me and into the disabled loo. When he came out, the gentleman in the regular toilet was still in there and I was getting pretty damn desperate. So I went to use the disabled/mother and baby loo as I couldn't hold it any longer. The man who had just come out grabbed the door, pulled it off me and said "No, that's for disabled people only" and slammed it shut. He then just stood there and I could say nothing more but "Oh!". He stood, clearly waiting for me to try it again, for about 30 seconds then seemed to get bored and walked off but continued to watch me from his table. A few minutes later, the lady that had been sitting at his table walked past me and used the loo.
Luckily, after about a 8-10 minute wait, the regular toilet became available and I think I was just in time before I wet myself!
Was I in the wrong here? I appreciate that disabled toilets are for disabled people but from what I could see, this was a larger, multi-function toilet. I completely understand I am not disabled and being pregnant is absolutely a choice and not even remotely In the same realm as having a disability in terms of need but if there was no line and no disabled person waiting to use the toilet, would I have been in the wrong for using it to prevent wetting myself?