⟡ “Safeguarding Disruption Was the Curriculum” ⟡
How Westminster Weaponised Welfare to Sabotage a Family’s Education
Filed: 30 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/FAMCOURT/ADD-EDUC-0625
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-30_Addendum_EducationRebuttal_InstitutionalDisruptionImpact.pdf
A formal rebuttal of Westminster’s claim that home education was absent — documenting how the harm came from them.
I. What Happened
Between October 2023 and June 2025, Polly Chromatic and her four children were continuously engaged in home education despite catastrophic interference by Westminster Children’s Services. Kirsty Hornal and Sam Brown issued destabilising threats, performed unannounced visits, and triggered health crises — culminating in the forcible removal of the children during an active homeschooling session on 23 June 2025.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
No discontinuity in education — Home education persisted uninterrupted
Misuse of safeguarding procedures as retaliation for legal filings and documentation
Disability discrimination and respiratory endangerment through repeated, infection-spreading visits
Gaslighting by omission — Westminster fabricated a narrative of neglect while refusing to examine the learning records
Procedural aggression — PLO letters issued without merit; supervision threats designed to derail educational stability
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because reality was reversed.
Westminster inverted the burden: They inflicted chaos, then blamed the mother for the mess.
SWANK logged this entry to restore narrative jurisdiction, to affirm that education was not only present — it was preserved through displacement, illness, and surveillance. The trauma came not from withdrawal of effort, but from a state that refused to let learning exist peacefully.
IV. Violations
Equality Act 2010 – Failure to make reasonable adjustments for a disabled parent
Article 8 ECHR – Interference with family and educational life without lawful necessity
Children Act 1989 – Disregard of child welfare and developmental needs in pursuit of enforcement optics
Public Law Principles – Abuse of process, disproportionality, and irrational escalation
V. SWANK’s Position
Home education was not absent. It was under siege.
The only interruptions to learning were those imposed by the very agents now using that disruption to justify more cruelty.
This wasn’t oversight. This was institutional vandalism disguised as concern.
We will not allow falsehoods to eclipse the lived reality of this family.
⟡ 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.
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.