SWANK ADDENDUM: Catalogue of Social Worker Errors

 SWANK ADDENDUM: Catalogue of Social Worker Errors

Title: Chronicle of Procedural Collapse – A Professional Autopsy

---

I. Refusal to Implement Lawful Communication Adjustments
Despite being served with a lawful, medically substantiated communication mandate under the Equality Act 2010, the social work apparatus elected to proceed as if clarity were optional. Repeated verbal contact attempts were made in defiance of clinical warnings (see: Rafiq Report, 26 November 2024), revealing a striking ignorance of both statute and ethics. The duty to make reasonable adjustments under Sections 20 and 29 was not merely overlooked—it was treated as an inconvenience.

II. Procedural Retaliation Following Protected Complaints
Having been named in formal complaints to Westminster, RBKC, and external oversight bodies, social workers retaliated by invoking CIN and PLO mechanisms—not to safeguard children, but to discipline the mother for non-compliance with their unlawful demands. Escalation was not based on risk, but on the audacity of resistance. This is not safeguarding; it is institutional ego masquerading as concern.

III. Mischaracterisation and Defamation of Parental Capacity
The parent was branded "resistant" for her refusal to perform deference. Her ability to cite statutory protections was recoded as instability. Medical evidence was ignored in favour of psychoanalytic improvisation by non-clinicians. In short: where there was law, they scribbled over it with feeling.

IV. Neglect of Evident Child Wellbeing
Children were demonstrably healthy, educated, and emotionally bonded. This was neither documented nor celebrated, but rather erased. The success of home education was treated as irrelevant. The children’s voices—uncoached, articulate, consistent—were excluded entirely. Why? Because they contradicted the narrative already in motion.

V. Documented Contradictions Across Visits and Staff
One worker noted the children were thriving. Another, within the same timeframe, recommended escalation. False claims of non-engagement were logged despite a fully documented chain of written responses. The left hand wasn’t just unaware of the right—it was actively contradicting it.

VI. Reckless Procedural Intrusion
Visits occurred while the parent was in a state of medical crisis, despite prior notice and legal objection. Staff brought respiratory illness into a household containing immunocompromised children. Written-only boundaries were violated as a matter of practice, not accident. These are not errors—they are ideological refusals to recognize authority outside themselves.

VII. Institutional Arrogance and Escalation Culture
Boundaries were treated as provocations. The legal framework was viewed as optional. What should have been a safeguarding structure became an escalatory theatre in which “concern” was used to conceal coercion. The result? A system more loyal to its internal narratives than to the welfare of actual children.

Filed by:
Polly Chromatic
Filed not in anger, but in accuracy. For legal record, institutional memory, and future disciplinary review.