“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

She Said “It’s My Birthday.” They Said “Pick a New Day.”


⟡ She Told Them It Was Her Birthday. They Scheduled Around It. ⟡
When a disabled mother said “I won’t be home,” the State replied “Happy birthday — now pick a date.”

Filed: 27 December 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-18
📎 Download PDF – 2024-12-27_SWANK_Email_Kirsty_BirthdayBoundary_DisabilityDisclosureDismissed.pdf
An email exchange documenting a parent’s attempt to establish a personal and medical boundary — dismissed by social workers eager to reschedule their next intrusion. The birthday wasn’t the point. The disability disclosure was. And they ignored both.

I. What Happened

She wrote to say:
– January 16th is her birthday.
– She will not be available.
– She lives with a medical condition that limits her ability to speak.
– She prefers telepathy. Email is fine.

It was a polite refusal. A wink toward exhaustion.
A boundary — disguised as banter.

Kirsty replied:
– “Oh no! That’s fine – happy birthday in advance.”
– “Let us know what date would work best.”

Translation: We’ve read none of this.
Interpretation: We’re not actually asking.

II. What the Email Establishes

  • That the parent gave formal, advance notice that she would not be home

  • That she disclosed a legitimate respiratory communication disability

  • That Kirsty acknowledged the birthday — but not the refusal

  • That the council prioritised scheduling over wellbeing

  • That administrative politeness is often the disguise of pressure

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because “happy birthday” shouldn’t be followed by “when can we come disrupt you again?”
Because refusal in a pretty font is still refusal.
And because if your disability disclosure includes humour,
that doesn’t make it optional — it makes it human.

IV. Violations Identified

  • Failure to Respect a Parent’s Declared Availability and Personal Occasion

  • Ignoring Documented Disability Exemption from Verbal Communication

  • Procedural Intrusion Despite Clear Decline

  • Use of Casual Tone to Bypass Consent

  • Institutional Normalisation of Boundary Overwriting

V. SWANK’s Position

This wasn’t about a birthday.
It was about dignity.
A parent said, “No, not then.”
The State said, “We’ll check your calendar.”
When refusal becomes rescheduling —
it’s not care.
It’s control.

⟡ 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.

Documented Obsessions