You Had the File. You Asked for a Phone Call Anyway.

---

⟡ She Couldn’t Breathe. Neither Could I. And They Still Asked Me to Call. ⟡
“The GP called. I responded in writing. The social worker asked for a phone call.”

Filed: 21 November 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC-NHS/EMAILS-13
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-21_SWANK_EmailAdjustment_WCC-NHS_HonorEmergency_VerbalDisabilityProtocol.pdf
Written response confirming verbal communication disability and coordinating emergency care for Honor. Safeguarding staff ignored the adjustment and requested a phone call anyway.

---

I. What Happened

On 21 November 2024, during an active respiratory emergency affecting both the parent and her daughter Honor, the parent:

• Notified Kirsty Hornal and Dr Philip Reid that Heir’s oxygen levels remained dangerously low

• Reaffirmed that verbal disability protocols were in place and that all communication must remain written-only

• Coordinated via email with the GP

• Declined a phone call requested by social services, citing her well-documented respiratory and psychiatric conditions

Despite knowing that the parent could not speak — and had already provided both a medical file and written updates— social services still attempted to escalate the interaction by demanding voice contact.

The email served as both a medical update and a formal refusal to breach the Equality Act.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

• That Westminster Children’s Services knowingly disregarded a written disability adjustment during a respiratory emergency

• That the NHS GP was able to comply with written-only communication, but the social worker chose not to

• That the verbal communication request was neither urgent nor legally necessary

• That this occurred while Heir’s oxygen levels were being monitored and the parent was physically unable to speak

• That the safeguarding framework continues to prioritise procedural dominance over legal compliance

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because when your child is having breathing trouble and so are you — and someone asks you to call them anyway —
you’re not dealing with care. You’re dealing with control.

Because when the GP understands your limits and still responds in writing,
but the social worker doesn’t —
you’re no longer dealing with miscommunication. You’re dealing with defiance.

This isn’t failure to understand.
It’s refusal to comply.

So we complied with the law.
They didn’t.
And now we have the email.

---

IV. Violations

• Equality Act 2010 – Section 20
  Repeated failure to honour medically documented written-only adjustment

• Human Rights Act 1998 – Articles 3 and 8
  Interference with bodily integrity and private family life during illness

• Care Act 2014 – Statutory Safeguarding Guidance
  Ignored communication needs of disabled parent during acute care episode

• Children Act 1989 / 2004
  Failure to engage appropriately during an active emergency involving a minor

---

V. SWANK’s Position

We weren’t trying to avoid contact.
We were trying to breathe.

We didn’t refuse support.
We refused harassment masked as protocol.

This wasn’t safeguarding.
It was disregard, repeated in real time.

And now — it’s logged.
And published.

---

⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡

Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.

To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.

This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.

Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.

© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.

---