“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

You Say It’s About My Children—But You Refuse to Let Them Hear It Later

 ⟡ SWANK Recording Rights Dispatch: Volume II ⟡


28 February 2024

This Meeting Will Be Misquoted. That’s Why I Asked to Record It.


Labels: coercion avoidance, mapping misconduct, SWANK reply archive, recording integrity, social work gaslight, parental sovereignty, ICPC procedural theatre

—

I. A Meeting Called "Support" That Won’t Allow Witnesses

The exchange begins with yet another overreach.
Samira Issa, Social Worker at RBKC, confirms:

  • A mapping meeting on 1 March

  • An ICPC conference on 4 March

  • Her refusal to allow the meeting to be recorded, threatening to terminate the session if recording is suspected

She cloaks this refusal in faux empathy:

“We appreciate this may be frustrating, but we do not believe that recording contributes to productive conversations.”

Translation: we want to be free to rewrite your words.

—

II. Noelle’s Response: Decisive, Calm, Devastating

At 21:27, Noelle responds with a field manual in integrity:

“Recording is a great tool for improving the productiveness of communication.”
“My children and I use recordings as a tool to pinpoint areas of improvement in our own behaviour and communication.”

She doesn’t argue.
She models a standard—one the social workers cannot meet.

“Humans who strive to be their best see the value in recording discussions… and don’t see it as a barrier.”

This is not a reply. It is a diagnosis of their fear of accuracy.

—

III. Samira’s Logic Breaks Under Its Own Weight

Despite calling the meeting “supportive”, she:

  • Refuses children’s presence

  • Refuses written clarity about concerns

  • Refuses to be recorded

  • Insists on writing a report based on what only she heard

That is a trap disguised as help.

—

Filed under:
recording refusal, social worker rewrite, procedural dishonesty, ICPC distortion, SWANK verbal integrity doctrine

© SWANK Archive. All Patterns Reserved. If you won’t allow a recording, you’re not seeking truth—you’re avoiding it.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This archive is a witness table, not a control panel.

We do not moderate comments. We do, however, read them, remember them, and occasionally reframe them for satirical or educational purposes.

If you post here, you’re part of the record.

Civility is appreciated. Candour is immortal.

Documented Obsessions