Can we lay this to rest, once and for all?

[HelenaWaiting]

I'm disabled. I have MS and a congenital heart condition. I'm wheelchair dependent. Only if you are disabled or a carer do you understand how difficult it is to find a disabled toilet (there is always just one), how disappointing it is to find that toilet occupied, and how infuriating to discover that the occupant was some twat trying on a dress. So please, please stop saying "trans people can use disabled toilets". I've been fielding that particular curve ball for years but now we have Kemi Fucking Badenoch saying it. (No, she's not great. No she's not on our side. She's an entitled, vacuous, talent-free zone. She just happens to be a gender critical entitled, vacuous, talent-free zone). I can't wait for the loo as long as you can. I don't get as much warning as you. I can't hold onto it as efficiently as you. And I have no desire to piss myself in a shopping centre because some hulking great bloke in an ill-fitting dress is touching up his make-up. Disabled people campaigned for years for accessible toilets. There still aren't enough of them. Please don't hand them over to a group of people who have chosen to have a problem.

Thank you this is useful information. To be frank, there is a problem with ventilation in enclosed toilets - they need more mechanical extraction which often isn’t adequate - so it is very important this isn’t overlooked in design.

Yes ventilation is an issue - but exiting a smelly closed room is humiliating enough, exiting a room knowing the person waiting to go in next outside has just against their will listened to you having diarrhea and been able to smell it "live" before you could flush or use vi poo or whatever (not that that is strong enough for Crohn's flare poo) - and that that isn't a one off but will happen most likely every time you go out - would be just awful. I know my relative wouldn't leave home.

I have a large 6 bedroom house and I can tell when I open the front door if my relative has been to the toilet upstairs within the last half hour. There is no smell like it. Gap cubicles would be an absolute no. I do understand your campaign and don't know how to suggest balancing the chance of safety needs versus the certainty of privacy and dignity needs. More floor level panic buttons? A talk activated sound/vision system with a cue word?

No - more technology isn’t the answer. It needs servicing, monitoring, causes lots of problems and is ignored. Schools have even tried heat sensors and they don’t work. You end up having the equivalent of cameras inside the loos. Can you imagine a tannoy coming on to ask if you are ok if you had just done a large trump?

You cannot rely on people having heart attacks, seizures, strokes, and hypos being aware of their surroundings enough or making the correct noises to activate an alarm. Another factor is a door gap ensures the occupant knows who is around them and shows people outside how many are in the cubicle. This is why it prevents assaults taking place in the first place.

This is why we have to balance privacy with safety. Obviously Crohns is a disability and this is why people don’t understand that people who use disabled toilets may need them quickly and will be ambulant. Disabled toilets are so often neglected and should be the best equipped and have the best cleaning schedule and monitoring outside, for the safety and comfort of the people who use them. A working alarm cord that reaches the floor and is checked regularly is a must.

The overwhelming evidence I have is that door gaps provide the most reliable, cheap way of ensuring health and safety for the rest of us. Which includes the millions of ambulant people with epilepsy, diabetes and heart conditions. That means single sex design.

You still haven’t explained where I take my DS to the toilet?

Are you asking about parent and child loos?

No, disabled male teenager with a female carer and what toilet design Keeptoiletssafe thinks there should be for them.

The point LC and I have been making is that enclosed toilets are not worse for everyone. They are better for some people. The opposite is also true.

It's also a case of the locations the toilets are. I mentioned businesses because these toilets are not in people's homes, they are in public buildings and businesses where there are also demands around space and costs to be considered.

You keep taking as if there was only one consideration and it is clear what is best for all, when in fact there are all kinds of needs and sometimes the best interests of differernt users conflict.

I'm not sure why you keep saying it's tricky to talk about, it really isn't.

You can't mitigate all risks. People have seizures and strokes every day in their homes.

The disabled toilet or accessible toilet.

Please could you answer my previous question if you have any evidence of people not going out specifically as they can’t access a toilet that is completely private? I am always after evidence to formulate ideas.

The disabled toilets that you propose that should be within single sex spaces?

You have already been told about someone who couldn’t go out without a private toilet. You aren’t really interested. You appear to have no idea or imagination about the constraints restricted toilet facilities place on people with a range of disabilities.

Sorry to hear you experience this OP.

I think more retailers should adopt Wagamama's approach. A row of separate little rooms, some marked M, some F, some 'everybody'. Disabled loo for disabled people.

I am interested. It’s just I have said all this before to you. The single sex disabled toilets would be lovely for people to use as an addition to what you use. The disabled toilets I have used as a carer to 2 different people in wheelchairs, have been disgusting, filled with chairs and used as storage, the cord tied up high. We had to queue up too.

So I want more disabled provision that was not so disgusting I had to wipe services down and check for needles etc before she transferred from chair to toilet. It would have meant the teenager I was carer for could have gone in by themselves and managed. I could imagine a women’s disabled toilet would be cleaner and if there was a door gap, she could have called me. The door gap would have been useful as a deterrent for other things happening in the toilet that would lead to it being so dirty. To go in by herself would give her more dignity.

Interestingly the disabled people I know call them disabled loos so I have always done too. They can’t identify out of being disabled. I think ‘accessible’ means that more people will use it who shouldn’t - but that’s my opinion.

The other situation was a person who had mental health problems. And I asked what exactly was it that their needs were. Was it actually about the gap or about germs/ feeling trapped/ smells/ lights etc.

I am listening. There are so many permutations but I am going off my experiences, statistics, newspaper reports, government reports and analysis. You can’t get better than single sex designs for safety.

Agree - and if they are on their own and collapse they are less likely to survive. The awful tragedy of Gene Hackmans wife is she wasn’t alone but he didn’t know how to help. In contrast, the woman who felt ill and collapsed at work was in the BBC corridor so Michael Moseley was passing, saved her life by being seeing her collapsed and doing successful cpr. She went to have 2 kids. I have so many of these stories as well as my own.

If someone feels ill and rushes to the toilet at home, you are more likely to know and check on them.

It’s like the argument people use of ‘your toilet at home is enclosed and gender neutral’. The people who use my home toilet would not use it like the ‘public’ do, nor would I be cautious of who is around the door whilst I was in. I don’t ever even lock it.

What the point of defibrillators in public, if the person who needs it can’t be seen or heard?

You can’t mitigate against all risks but you can do assessments and try.

what happens when a trans identifying individual is also disabled? Disabled loos are generally unisex..............

This is the most sensible solution.

It depends what disability they have. If they have epilepsy (1% of the country have epilepsy), they will be safer in a single sex toilet with a door gap. Diabetes too although an ambulant one could be useful if they need a shelf for equipment. Ambulant but frail people are best in an ambulant toilet with grab rails but need the single sex version that can have a door gap incase they fall. If they are in a wheelchair then a disabled toilet due to the space and grab rails. Depending on the disability it will depend which toilet you go to. It’s self explanatory isn’t it?

There was a poster further up the thread who was talking about a friend with Crohns - she needs the toilet very quickly. That’s why people shouldn’t be using disabled toilets unless there is a proper need.

Single sex toilets with door gaps are safer and cleaner than unisex. Less horrible things happen in them. Disabled toilets are always unisex. It would be nice if disabled people could have a choice of single sex and people who didn’t actually need them stayed out. It is wrong that disabled loos are in such a state nationally. No one is policing loos - it relies on trust and that people will respect those more medically vulnerable.

Remember any of us could have a medical emergency so single sex with door gaps should be the default (disabled toilets can’t be part of this yet).

well I won't be standing in a queue waiting to pee if their is a disabled loo not being used and I have no problem with trans identifying person using a unisex disabled loo. The trans issue is really important one because of the mutilation of children, the undermining of woman's rights, and the bastardisation of language and consequent attempts to compel speech. Unisex v single sex loos and whether there is gap under the door in case someone has a fit are of little interest to me.

What is the difference between you and a man saying he has no issue with trans identified men using women’s toilets?

There are known medical reasons for a disproportionally high frequency of cardiac arrests and strokes while an individual is in the toilet room. There are around 100,000 hospital admissions due to heart attacks in this country, equating to one every five minutes. It is estimated there are 400,000 people in the U.K. with undiagnosed heart failure. There are also around 100,000 strokes in this country, equating to one every five minutes. Around 1% of people in this country have epilepsy and around 80 people are diagnosed with epilepsy each day. There are many other conditions that lead to collapse where you need to be noticed and accessed quickly eg. diabetes and asthma.

Mind the gap. It could save someone’s life that you know someday.

Again, you are missing the point being made which is that there are all kinds of considerations besides a person who might possibly collapse when they are possibly in a public toilet and possibly might not be found quickly.

You could mitigate against it in people's homes too by having door gaps there, or cameras that are monitored, but guess what - people don't like that idea.

You also seem to have this idea that somehow there is endless space and money for a multiplicity of designs. The fact is that cost is also a factor. Which is frankly part of the reason that people who run public facilities aren't thrilled with the idea of a whole differernt set of bathrooms being required beyond the three that you typically see.

Fair point OP, but it might also be a very opportune time to lobby for more accessible toilets given there is such an enormous focus on toilet needs in the UK at the moment. For years women in academia had issues if they changed their surname upon marrying as any prior work would not be associated with work published under their new name. But thanks to it being an issue more recently for people changing names due to a gender change, the universities and publishers have put in place systems to update previous publications. When the goodwill is there, it is amazing what can be achieved! (And yes, it is awful that the needs of people with disabilities were not enough to spur organisations to provide the required facilities.)

Disability Rights UK (was RADAR, of “RADAR key toilets) and many other disability organisations have come out against the Supreme Court judgement and are promoting “trans” as a disability and/or as a cause of disability. This is due to being colonised by transactivists.

“Disability Rights UK opposes the UK Supreme Court ruling on ‘biological sex’”

www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/disability-rights-uk-opposes-uk-supreme-court-ruling-%E2%80%98biological-sex%E2%80%99

“Trans and Disability Justice: How Are Our Struggles Linked?”

www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/trans-and-disability-justice-how-are-our-struggles-linked

There is nothing intrinsic to “gender critical belief” that necessitates a particular attitude towards use of Accessible Toilets.

However, although this Mumsnet Board has been renamed “Feminism: Sex and gender discussions” it was originally “Feminism Women’s Rights”. Regular posters are therefore likely to be both “gender critical” and respectful of the rights and needs of people with disabilities / disabled people.

Disability Rights organisations have the right to be transactivist organisations too if they wish.

However, they will have more chance of success in securing the support and sympathy of “gender critical” people generally in terms of priority or exclusive use of “Disabled/Adapted/Accessible Toilets” if they stop actively campaigning against women’s rights and safeguarding children.

IMHO it therefore is genuinely a waste of time advocating on this Board for “gender critical people” to stop suggesting that a “third space” for “trans people” should be engineered by encouraging them to use the existing “third space” designed for “Disabled Access”.

OP, ”These are not the gender critical people you are looking for.”

You are preaching to the converted here, despite the fact that Disability Organisations are going out of their way to antagonise “gender critical people” and secure their support for reassigning Accessible Toilets as “Gender Neutral” for anyone and everyone.

Riding the trans bandwagon while calling for support from “gender critical people” is not a winning gambit.

It is up to “gender critical people” within Disability Organisations to resist institutional capture by transactivists, which IMHO would be time better spent all round.

You need to get real. There are never going to be a myriad style of loos to suit the particular needs of individuals.

There already are in some parts of the world, with a good array of single sex, accessible, gender neutral and parenting rooms. Possibly harder in parts of the UK where many of the buildings are historic and space is limited.

Obviously no one should stay at home alone anyway, in case they have a fit, heart attack, feel suicidal, or overdose. Lots of people die at home and are not found for ages…

There has to be consideration of benefits as well as risks. In general the benefits of having single sex toilets with gaps under the doors substantially outweighs the risk of enclosing all the toilets or having unisex spaces and therefore this should be the default position. But this is not always true. For some people the benefits of a fully enclosed unisex accessible toilet outweighs the risk of harm within them (and the cleanliness of those toilets should be maintained). This includes in cafes where there is only room for one toilet.