In the master, I can totally see it. My parents have his-n-hers, and as they age they appreciate having their own space for all their health accoutrements.

In a kids bath I don't get it, but I'm not a fan of Jack-n-Jill.

Nice. We had a similar MCM set-up, but not quite as groovy. One room in the center that contained the tub and the W/D. On either side of that room were symmetrical rooms containing the sink, commode and a linen closet. These symmetrical rooms opened into the halls. On the ca 1960 BH&G blueprints, it was described as a "compartment bath".

I definitely get the idea behind the master suite "sides", but I am not so sure about the bathroom that seems to be for siblings. It doesn't seem that it would get used any differently than a full bath? Would two people use the toilet at the same time divided by translucent shower walls? Would a person of one gender use the sink or toilet on the A side while someone from the B side of the opposite gender especially was using the shower? If they would, they might as well be in the same bathroom. I am not sure how that one works...

That said, I love the tile format in both bathrooms. I even like the sea horse (?) motif tile in the Master.

It's interesting, too, that what seems to be the "female" side of the master (stained glass pendant) has a fruit wood sort of 60s French Provincial, while the "male" side has more rustic raised panel doors. (?)

Roman tubs are so uncomfortable...

And hazardous depending how sunken they are. I guess this is why you never really see them anymore.

I can't see where this would be useful for guests or siblings. The whole purpose of a Jack and Jill back IMO is for one person to be able to take a bath/shower or use the W/C in private while another can use the sink area.

I agree although I think this is more about the siblings having their own vanity and toilet rather than being able to use the toilet when someone else is in the bathroom. It does take up a lot of room to have this separation.

I don't think they are overly practical, I like the 1960s historical esthetic.

I think the first thing that I would do would be to destroy that historical esthetic and put in something usable. The Roman bath does have a shower head but there's no curtain and that's a mess. If you put in glass on both sides you get a big squeegee job at the end of each shower. My guess is that this is an older house where the children have long since left and the adjoining bedrooms and Jack and Jill bathroom are just not used except occasionally for company.

The house is 50 years old.

I don't think you would have to destroy the historical esthetic to put in something usable. The roman bath gives you a whole bankroll of tiles and you could bring the floor up to level and put in a suitable looking freestanding tub in the space, repair the spots where the old plumbing was and call it done. I am not sure why the roman bath has a shower head, there is a shower right next to it.

Or you could take one vanity and toilet area out, turn that into a closet, and put a tub in the alcove and again, if you are careful, have enough vintage tile to fix the alcove up.

I would not be so preservation minded if people who tore out these bathrooms replaced them with something of comparable quality of workmanship, (appropriate esthetics aside, that's another issue), but most of the time it seems like these built-like a battleship bathrooms get destroyed, and the quality of the new one is an inferior POS in comparison.

In any case I am not sure what the rationale was behind the division of these spaces because the house has SIX bathrooms and two powder rooms or seven bathrooms depending upon the source. I am not sure anybody has to poop in the same bathroom as someone taking a shower anyway.

I hate I didn't go see the house last weekend when there was an open house. It's in our old/last neighborhood where we lived for 20+ years. I love the backyard/pool area but not the kitchen, which I know Pal would keep with counter replacement. If this were my style, and I did buy the house, I wouldn't rip out the kitchen either. I think the shower head in the Roman tub is a nice feature, so you can rinse hair or body off before getting out. Something has always bothered me about taking a tub bath and not rinsing off any soap or shampoo residue. Here is the listing. The house is located on a desirable street in a top rated city school system.

Looking at the listing, I could live there happily, changing out some of the overhead lighting and some of the overly ornate fixtures. Yes, the bathrooms are odd, but everything looks like it has been taken care of very nicely. Love the staircase!

That's actually a reasonable price in that location -- I fear this one will be redone soon.

What a beautiful home! I remember those sliding door medicine "cabinets" that were built into the backsplash. That should come back iwith an updated version! :) I bet skimming that pool is a full time job! I could easily enjoy living there once the parquet floors were replaced.

It's beautiful, I adore it! I was born in 1965 and it makes me feel safe and nostalgic. I could happily live in it as is.

That's a really great house. Love the grounds. I would maybe avoid the step-in Roman tub, but otherwise, it's great. I love a modern house on a wooded lot. Someday maybe!

I really love that house! I could totally dig living there.

TBH I would never have built his and hers bathrooms, but they are one of my favorite features of our CT house. I would choose or build this config again.

Jack and Jill does not always work so well. We have a jill and and hill, with the toilet in its own water closet, and that works very well.

We had shower doors like that, and all I can think when I see them was how quickly the tracks would get dirty. They are bad design