To the Editor:

Bathrooms: Love ’em or hate ’em, we need ’em. Ideally, you’re always able to use the golden throne in your own home. However, we all know this isn’t always the case.

Inevitably, nature calls when we’re far from the sanctity of our private space, leading us to the public toilet. I believe our current public restroom system is severely flawed, leaving a large part of our population uncomfortable and unsatisfied. It must be fixed.

Take a moment to picture a public restroom. I’m sure “comfort” and “privacy” are not the first words that come to mind. For many, this might be good enough. But for countless others, the public bathroom is a place of genuine anxiety.

My demand is simple: No one should have to debate “toughing it out” until they get home. To see this as a non-issue is a privilege, one that overlooks the daily reality for a significant portion of our population.

This anxiety isn’t distributed equally. A fact often overlooked is that around 40 percent of the world’s population is thought to have a functional gastrointestinal disorder, leading to unpredictable and urgent needs. For this large group, the perils of a public restroom are amplified by embarrassment and stress.

They are not alone. Gender non-conforming individuals often face anxiety and harassment when choosing between bathrooms that don’t align with their identity, using flimsy stalls that offer little protection.

Caretakers of children or elderly relatives of a different gender face an awkward choice that can leave everyone feeling uneasy. Economically disadvantaged people, who may not have a reliable private restroom, must often depend on public facilities of questionable quality.

Taken together, these groups represent a huge portion of the public for whom the current system is not just inconvenient, but actively stressful and exclusionary.

The solution is obvious and already exists in many places: private, fully enclosed, single-occupancy bathrooms, perhaps with a shared sink area for efficiency. This design provides the privacy and comfort people deserve and eliminates many of the fears associated with public facilities.

Yes, there are costs. Building with solid walls is more expensive than installing cheap partitions, and cleaning individual rooms can be less efficient. There are also concerns about a lack of visibility if someone is in distress.

But ultimately, these costs are small compared to the daily, invisible costs of anxiety and indignity paid by users. The question isn’t whether we can afford to build better bathrooms, but how we can create a system that values everyone’s comfort and privacy.

The most practical path forward is economic. Now, let me stop you right there. I am not suggesting some kind of Urinetown-esque world where you’re charged every time you take a leak. Instead, I propose a system where buildings are still required to provide adequate free bathrooms, but are also incentivized to offer a premium, pay-to-go option. This gives people the choice to decide how much they value a truly private bathroom.

I get it, the idea of paying for a bathroom raises concerns about fairness. But let’s be honest about the hidden “cover charge” that already exists. We’ve all felt the pressure in a “customers only” establishment, where the price of admission to a standard, often unpleasant, stall is a begrudgingly purchased soda.

This proposal isn’t about taking away the free option; it’s about adding a more honest one. It gives people the choice to pay a small, direct fee for a genuinely comfortable space, instead of being cornered into a purchase they didn’t want for a bathroom they have to settle for.

Currently, paid bathrooms are banned or disincentivized in states where nearly three-quarters of the United States population lives, largely due to successful lobbying efforts. I understand the concern.

My proposal doesn’t seek to remove the existing free stalls. It argues that, if we allow businesses to add “premium” individual bathrooms for a capped fee, perhaps $1 to $5, they would be strongly incentivized to build them.

While we could mandate these changes through building codes or offer tax credits, such top-down approaches are often slow and spread the cost across everyone, regardless of need. A better first step is to empower consumers and incentivize businesses directly.

A premium pay-per-use option allows those who value privacy most to fund the construction of better facilities immediately, without waiting for regulation to catch up. It preserves the free option for all while giving individuals the choice to pay for a higher standard of comfort and dignity.

This is a solution that lets the market solve a problem that has been ignored for too long. My hope is that no matter how these better bathrooms are implemented, they provide comfort and privacy for generations to come. It’s time to take care of business, both literally and figuratively.

Riley Better

Guilderland