Narrative:

We were cleared by center for the ILS runway xx into ZZZ. The weather in ZZZ was VFR but we needed to descend below an overcast layer to get the runway in sight. After descending on the ILS and before the FAF we saw the airport and continued the approach with visual callouts. Center then switched us to the CTAF; we did not call the airport insight before switching to CTAF. At 500 feet AGL the flight attendant (flight attendant) called us on the emergency call button that she had a passenger in the lavatory. We decided to execute a go-around to allow the passenger to use the lavatory and retake his seat. After the go-around we joined the traffic pattern and verified with flight attendant that the passenger was reseated. We then contacted center and let them know we did a go-around and were in the pattern to land runway xx. Center responded there was another inbound for the field and to cancel IFR as soon as possible after landing. We landed uneventfully and during the debrief we realized we were still on the ILS when we executed the go-around and ATC may have expected us to fly the published missed approach procedure; instead of joining the traffic pattern.the cause of this event was the preconceived idea that we were on the visual approach because we had the airport insight and the weather on the field was VFR. Another contributing factor was the distraction of the emergency call button and communication with the flight attendant at a low altitude.this event could be avoided in the future by more proactively calling the airport insight to obtain a visual approach when weather permits.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ-200 pilot reported a go-around with passenger in the lavatory while still on the ILS; and executed incorrect go-around procedure.

Narrative: We were cleared by Center for the ILS Runway XX into ZZZ. The weather in ZZZ was VFR but we needed to descend below an overcast layer to get the runway in sight. After descending on the ILS and before the FAF we saw the airport and continued the approach with visual callouts. Center then switched us to the CTAF; we did not call the airport insight before switching to CTAF. At 500 feet AGL the FA (Flight Attendant) called us on the emergency call button that she had a passenger in the lavatory. We decided to execute a go-around to allow the passenger to use the lavatory and retake his seat. After the go-around we joined the traffic pattern and verified with FA that the passenger was reseated. We then contacted Center and let them know we did a go-around and were in the pattern to land Runway XX. Center responded there was another inbound for the field and to cancel IFR as soon as possible after landing. We landed uneventfully and during the debrief we realized we were still on the ILS when we executed the go-around and ATC may have expected us to fly the published missed approach procedure; instead of joining the traffic pattern.The cause of this event was the preconceived idea that we were on the visual approach because we had the airport insight and the weather on the field was VFR. Another contributing factor was the distraction of the emergency call button and communication with the FA at a low altitude.This event could be avoided in the future by more proactively calling the airport insight to obtain a visual approach when weather permits.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.