Do you use the handicapped stall?

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If the older lady had a cane, she well should get that stall ahead of the other person. People who use canes quite probably have some disorder or weakness involving their hips, legs, perhaps spine - and are more likely to need the support bars that are only available beside toilets in the larger handicapped accessible stalls. The mom w/stroller kid was right to allow the woman to go first.

I will go where I feel I need to go.

Last time I checked, no id or medical record is required to use a space that is marked accessible but isn't marked restricted and it is just as discourteous for someone with a disorder of some kind to judge others who do not travel around with an assistive device.

We don't know if mom with stroller "allowed" her--or if the woman gave her the evil "don't you dare" eye.

We presume too much about people we do not know.

 

[merryweather20]

It gets kind of frustrating reading through these posts, of all the people who claim the accessible washroom is:

1. super fun times!
2. great for kids!

and from my own experience people like to use it as a dressing room, a smoke hole, and a neckin spot.

That washroom is an exceedingly poor place to take children. The toilette itself is much higher than the regular stalls, and therefore much more uncomfortable for your children to use.

I will go where I feel I need to go.

Last time I checked, no id or medical record is required to use a space that is marked accessible but isn't marked restricted and it is just as discourteous for someone with a disorder of some kind to judge others who do not travel around with an assistive device.

We don't know if mom with stroller "allowed" her--or if the woman gave her the evil "don't you dare" eye.

We presume too much about people we do not know.

We do not need to presume at all katiedr mentioned in her post that the woman used a regular stall after being reprimanded by the lady.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

It gets kind of frustrating reading through these posts, of all the people who claim the accessible washroom is:

1. super fun times!
2. great for kids!

and from my own experience people like to use it as a dressing room, a smoke hole, and a neckin spot.

That washroom is an exceedingly poor place to take children. The toilette itself is much higher than the regular stalls, and therefore much more uncomfortable for your children to use.



We do not need to presume at all katiedr mentioned in her post that the woman used a regular stall after being reprimanded by the lady.

Some young children have to be helped onto a regular potty that is also too big for them.

Some moms might have weak backs that inhibit their ability to bend over to help aid their child from falling into the toilet. At home--they have a mini seat and a step stool and it isn't a problem b/c the toilet can now accomodate their children.

Some moms respect their childs right to privacy and cannot aid their small-pottying child in a regular stall with the door closed b/c there isn't enough room.

And some moms--just need to go and cannot leave their child(ren) unattended and the little tots are not necessarily using the potty anyway but are too young to be left unattended in the open bathroom.

In the end, it really is noone's business what qualifies a person to use one stall over the other.

 

[DMickey28]

I use it almost all the time, usually because I have my toddler with me. Have you tried getting into one of those stalls with a kid and a pregnant belly? I usually end up having to stand on the toliet to close the door .... yeah, I use the handicapped stall.

 

[merryweather20]

Some young children have to be helped onto a regular potty that is also too big for them.

Some moms might have weak backs that inhibit their ability to bend over to help aid their child from falling into the toilet. At home--they have a mini seat and a step stool and it isn't a problem b/c the toilet can now accomodate their children.

Some moms respect their childs right to privacy and cannot aid their small-pottying child in a regular stall with the door closed b/c there isn't enough room.

And some moms--just need to go and cannot leave their child(ren) unattended and the little tots are not necessarily using the potty anyway but are too young to be left unattended in the open bathroom.

In the end, it really is noone's business what qualifies a person to use one stall over the other.

If they need to be helped onto a regular potty, its much better for it to be a familiar size and closer to the ground.

The "some Moms" with the weak backs would be much better off lifting their child only a short way up to a regular seat, than aaaaaaalll the way up to an accessible seat.

In your third point the children need assistance in the bathroom, but also want privacy? There is none if their children are sharing the stall, any stall, accessible or otherwise, and none if they need assistance

Your examples don't really cut it, but there are indeed plenty of people who NEED the accessible stall.

But, it isn't a super party stall, it isn't great for kids, it isn't a good place to smoke, or neck, or try on clothes.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If they need to be helped onto a regular potty, its much better for it to be a familiar size and closer to the ground.

The "some Moms" with the weak backs would be much better off lifting their child only a short way up to a regular seat, than aaaaaaalll the way up to an accessible seat.

In your third point the children need assistance in the bathroom, but also want privacy? There is none if their children are sharing the stall, any stall, accessible or otherwise, and none if they need assistance

Your examples don't really cut it, but there are indeed plenty of people who NEED the accessible stall.

But, it isn't a super party stall, it isn't great for kids, it isn't a good place to smoke, or neck, or try on clothes.

I wonder what your theory is on places that have only ONE stall and it is a handicap accessible stall. I suppose everyone without a handicap holds it until they get home.

Funny--I didn't know that people with disabilties do not have a capacity to be discourteous. B/c all you've stated is that they have a strong sense of entitlement.

It reminds me of those who can legitimately park in handicap spaces--only they are all taken...so they take it upon themselves to park in the gap between the spots b/c after all...they have a disability and need to park close.

Not all people have bladder issues--and they can certainly wait until their appropriate stall opens up if they are restricted to using that stall. It is getting so old as a justification for leaving that stall open and pretending that other people won't have a need to use it.

It is handicap accessible--not restricted.

As for toddlers--evidently you don't know how to prevent them from staring at the other while they potty and can't figure out the difference between that and a total complete stranger being able to view them.

 

[Magic Mom]

In the end, it really is noone's business what qualifies a person to use one stall over the other.

I think this needs to be repeated.

 

[Scurvy]

Last time I checked, no id or medical record is required to use a space that is marked accessible but isn't marked restricted and it is just as discourteous for someone with a disorder of some kind to judge others who do not travel around with an assistive device.

In the end, it really is noone's business what qualifies a person to use one stall over the other.

The handicap accessible stall is there for whoever needs it, just like the ramps on the curb by a parking lot. If someone feels they need to use it, it isn't up to anyone else to say they have more of a right to it. If I walk in to a bathroom at the same time as someone else and I have the option of using a different stall while they appear to be limited to the handicap accessible stall only, then I'll choose a different stall because I think that's the nice thing to do - but it isn't required. If I walk in and there's only one stall available and the person behind me has an emergency I'll probably let them go ahead of me - again because it's the nice thing to do, not because it's required. And frankly if someone came in and demanded that they go ahead of me, I would be very tempted to refuse. If they ask nicely, then of course I would let them go ahead of me if possible.

I find it hilarious when someone makes assumptions about whether someone else is disabled or not - unless you are their doctor, you don't know enough to make that call. I think it's ridiculous when people judge that they are more "deserving" of the stall than someone else simply because the other person doesn't look as disabled as they think she should. Of course none of that matters in this case because the handicap accessable stalls are not reserved for those who are disabled. They are open to anyone who needs them, for whatever reason.

The bottom line is that if someone feels unable or unwilling to use a "normal" stall for whatever reason, then they have as much right as the next person to use the handicap accessible stall and no one has the right to imply otherwise.

 

[KAYzEyes]

For me personally, common courtesy is a given. I'm blind, but my legs work fine. The reason I use the larger stall (if no one with a greater need is there) is because it's quite impossible (in 99.9% of cases) to fit my dog in a normal stall with me. But if a woman with a cane came in while I was waiting for such a large stall, you bet I'll have the common sense to let her use it ahead of me.

My mother is 80 yrs old and has had both her knees replaced. She walks with a cane and it's difficult for her to stand waiting in any line, for any period of time. So yeah, such a person trumps baby in stroller.

I doubt a toddler is going to worry much about whether someone might catch a glimpse of him/her on the potty. lol. Majority of tots are quite uninhibited & little exhibitionists. lol. And, with Mom standing in front of the kid while he/she's on the potty, someone would have to be pretty darn interested in seeing the child pee to crane her head around to peek past Mom to see the kid.

Anyway, I agree the stalls are not JUST for PWD, but it'd be nice if more people would practice common courtesy.

 

[merryweather20]

I wonder what your theory is on places that have only ONE stall and it is a handicap accessible stall. I suppose everyone without a handicap holds it until they get home.

Funny--I didn't know that people with disabilties do not have a capacity to be discourteous. B/c all you've stated is that they have a strong sense of entitlement.

It reminds me of those who can legitimately park in handicap spaces--only they are all taken...so they take it upon themselves to park in the gap between the spots b/c after all...they have a disability and need to park close.

Not all people have bladder issues--and they can certainly wait until their appropriate stall opens up if they are restricted to using that stall. It is getting so old as a justification for leaving that stall open and pretending that other people won't have a need to use it.

It is handicap accessible--not restricted.

As for toddlers--evidently you don't know how to prevent them from staring at the other while they potty and can't figure out the difference between that and a total complete stranger being able to view them.

You post seems to have nothing to do with mine so I'm not sure why you've quoted it.

I'm not sure why you think I would want everyone to "hold it" till they get home. Seems silly to me, and certainly nothing I even remotely suggested in my post.


"Funny--I didn't know that people with disabilties do not have a capacity to be discourteous. B/c all you've stated is that they have a strong sense of entitlement."

People with disabilities of course have the ability to be courteous. Why would you think otherwise? Such is not suggested in my post. and I'm at a loss as to why you think that discouraging smoking, necking and excessive preening in a single purpose built stall suggests entitlement. Quite the contrary, I think someone smoking and preening in a stall knowing there is only one, which many of the patrons can use is an entitled attitude. Insisting your children use a stall that is uncomfortable for them and to big, doesn't make much sense. How does that suggest I'm "entitled".

As to your parking comment, we were argueing on another thread, and I was tired of having people blocking me in. So I'm a little perplexed at how you magically transported the reverse viewpoint to me on a totally separate thread.

I didn't address bladder issues at all in my post. So I'm not sure why you've included this paragraph.

"It is handicap accessible--not restricted."

Bingo! Its Handicap accessible, not smoking accessible, not child friendly, not the VIP dressing room, and not a necking lounge.


I quite frankly don't understand your toddler comment either. Such is much simpler in a regular stall they are always an arm length away. Vs. an accessible stall where they could mill around to their hearts content, and easily crawl under to visit strangers while Mom is on the potty.

 

[Scurvy]

I doubt a toddler is going to worry much about whether someone might catch a glimpse of him/her on the potty. lol. Majority of tots are quite uninhibited & little exhibitionists. lol. And, with Mom standing in front of the kid while he/she's on the potty, someone would have to be pretty darn interested in seeing the child pee to crane her head around to peek past Mom to see the kid.

As a parent, I can completely understand why so many parents prefer to use the handicap accessible stall with their toddlers. It can be difficult to instill a sense of modesty in some children. Many parents are constantly trying to remind their children of the importance of keeping certain areas of their body private. We also have to teach them that certain activities are private. By the time some kids are toddler aged, they might still need some help but they should be learning about privacy as well. It is unreasonable to keep telling them that these areas and actions are private and then also insist that they use the bathroom with the stall door open, so that other people might see them. It's much more appropriate and much more kind to the child if we allow them to use the bathroom behind a closed stall door, and for those who still need assistance that means they need to use the handicap accessible stall.

 

[Scurvy]

I quite frankly don't understand your toddler comment either. Such is much simpler in a regular stall they are always an arm length away. Vs. an accessible stall where they could mill around to their hearts content, and easily crawl under to visit strangers while Mom is on the potty.

I'm guessing you haven't tried to fit yourself and a toddler into a regular stall recently. Most of them I've seen lately are so small that once you sit down your knees almost touch the door. There would be no way to cram a toddler in there too unless you were going to hold them on your lap.

 

[sbell111]

If that stall is handicapped-only, one wonders why that is where they so often put the baby changing station.

 

[sbell111]

Ahem.

Allow me to clear up a relatively common misconception.

There are NO amusement parks at Walt Disney World. WDW is a resort complex; its parks are THEME parks, not amusement parks. Six Flags is an amusement park. Canobie Lake Park is an amusement park. Many of you have amusement parks within relative driving distance of where you live - I'd list more, but I don't know other areas.

Magic Kingdom is a theme park. Epcot, DHS, Animal Kingdom? Theme parks. Universal? SeaWorld? Theme parks. Knott's Berry Farm? Ditto.

You do realize that 'theme park' is generally defined as an amusement park that is organized around some theme. 'Theme park' is a subset of 'amusement park'. Therefore, it is perfectly correct to call all Disney parks 'amusement parks' just as you are free to call your vehicle a lexus or a car. (I don't know that you drive a lexus, but I suspect that you do from your recent posts.)

 

[kaytieeldr]

Hats off to the mom with the toddler in the stroller...
she was kind enough to allow an older person with a cane utilize the handicap bathroom..

I can appreciate your kudos (and apparently the mom's need wasn't urgent to the point allowing someone ahead of her would have resulted in embarassment to her), but the way I understood it, the other woman demanded - not asked - that she go first.

We do not need to presume at all katiedr mentioned in her post that the woman used a regular stall after being reprimanded by the lady.

Right. The mom alone didn't "need" the handicap stall; however, had she simply left her son in his stroller in the waiting area while she used a standard-size stall, it's entirely conceivable that someone would have considered him neglected or abandoned. It's even possible someone could have simply walked off with the stroller and the child.

 

[kaytieeldr]

You do realize that 'theme park' is generally defined as an amusement park that is organized around some theme. Therefore, 'theme park' is a subset of 'amusement park'.

Subset? No. Distinct class of? Sure. Besides, I'm right. I'm always right, except when I admit I'm wrong. And I'm right. So there.

If you have any issues with the above statements, search for recent posts referring to AESOP

 

[Magic Mom]

and I'm at a loss as to why you think that discouraging smoking, necking and excessive preening in a single purpose built stall suggests entitlement. Quite the contrary, I think someone smoking and preening in a stall knowing there is only one, which many of the patrons can use is an entitled attitude.

I think that behavior is rude no matter what kind of stall it is. I'm not sure how we've gone from someone using the bathroom in a handicapped stall to people making out in a handicapped stall. I really don't think anyone here would advocate that.

Bingo! Its Handicap accessible, not smoking accessible, not child friendly, not the VIP dressing room, and not a necking lounge.



I quite frankly don't understand your toddler comment either. Such is much simpler in a regular stall they are always an arm length away. Vs. an accessible stall where they could mill around to their hearts content, and easily crawl under to visit strangers while Mom is on the potty.

They are extremely child friendly. Some of them have child restraint seats, changing tables, there is room for strollers, AND the biggest plus, there is room for BOTH the mother and the child. More and more, that isn't the case with a regular stall. Most regular stalls are hard to turn around in much less fit a toddler and an adult in.

 

[merryweather20]

I'm guessing you haven't tried to fit yourself and a toddler into a regular stall recently. Most of them I've seen lately are so small that once you sit down your knees almost touch the door. There would be no way to cram a toddler in there too unless you were going to hold them on your lap.

I haven't seen such a stall. How would the door even close in that instance? The previous poster wasn't concerned about room, she was concerned about "peeking" which of course would be much easier when they were roaming around, then when they were in a regular stall in arms length from Mom.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

You post seems to have nothing to do with mine so I'm not sure why you've quoted it.

Probably the same reason that you spoke about making out and smoking in response to my post. Our posts elicited a response from each other and we didn't keep to just that thought.

I'm not sure why you think I would want everyone to "hold it" till they get home. Seems silly to me, and certainly nothing I even remotely suggested in my post.

B/c some venues have just the one stall. It is marked with the wheelchair. So honestly -- how does one handle that situation if the idea is to keep such stalls reserved at all times for only those disabled enough to use it.

As to your parking comment, we were argueing on another thread, and I was tired of having people blocking me in. So I'm a little perplexed at how you magically transported the reverse viewpoint to me on a totally separate thread.

That is pure coincidence. I have no idea of which thread you speak nor do I go and follow posters around and drag other conversations into this one.

I simply was making it a point that just b/c someone feels the need to use something, it doesn't give them a right to trump other people.

People who do that with parking spaces are clearly doing something illegal and it is a pet peeve of mine even when I have never needed such a space. Simply brought it up as a means to point out that there are disabled folks with entitlement issues and it isn't up to me to tolerate such viewpoints when they feel their disability trumps respect for others.

I did not bring it up to bash you--and again--pure coincidence and I intended no malice against you when I mentioned it.

I didn't address bladder issues at all in my post. So I'm not sure why you've included this paragraph.

"It is handicap accessible--not restricted."

Bingo! Its Handicap accessible, not smoking accessible, not child friendly, not the VIP dressing room, and not a necking lounge.


I quite frankly don't understand your toddler comment either. Such is much simpler in a regular stall they are always an arm length away. Vs. an accessible stall where they could mill around to their hearts content, and easily crawl under to visit strangers while Mom is on the potty.

Bingo is right.

But I never mentioned smoking, making it a playroom (and yes it is child friendly by the way! Whether or not you choose to believe it, but it does make it easier to handle children)...nor did I mention it as a makeout lounge (really--WHO uses a restroom for that at Disney? I have NEVER come across that in attending Disney since the age of 3.), or a VIP dresisng room.


As for toddlers--what may be easier for you, may not make it easier for someone else and just like I cannot prove to you what makes things easier for you IMHO b/c I am not you, you cannot impress upon other people what may be easier for them.

My children have never had the issues that you have described--so thus, your comment is irrelevant to how I am able to manage my children's toileting habits when they are young and small. You can't prove to me that your way is better--b/c I know from experience what works best for my family.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I haven't seen such a stall. How would the door even close in that instance? The previous poster wasn't concerned about room, she was concerned about "peeking" which of course would be much easier when they were roaming around, then when they were in a regular stall in arms length from Mom.

The peeking is---

Some stalls do not have adequate space to accomodate 2 people..even if the toddler is pint size. So thus the door has to remain open to help them and my kids don't necessarily want an audience.

For mom to potty--sometimes, it is extremely difficult to manage to close the door and fit due to the poor space allocation at some venues.

That is yet another reason why some moms opt to use a larger stall. (I settle for teh ones that are just deepar and not necessarily wider.)

I wasn't talking about a kid who opts to peek into the stalls of others. My children have never done that.