THE CONDUCT AGREEMENT OF MEDICAL ILLITERATES
Metadata
Filed Date: 11 July 2025
Reference Code: SWK-AUD-0711-GSTT-CONDUCTAGREEMENT
PDF Filename: 2024-01-21_Agreement_GSTT_Kalisa_ConductTerms_ResponseToIncidentAllegation.pdf
Summary: A ludicrously inappropriate “conduct agreement” issued by Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust after denying emergency oxygen to a patient experiencing respiratory collapse — and then retaliating when she asked for air.
I. What Happened
On 21 January 2024, Polly Chromatic was issued a formal document from Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, titled an “Acceptance of Responsibilities Agreement.” It was written not in clinical language — but in what can only be described as bureaucratic fantasy prose.
The agreement:
Accuses Polly of failing to treat others with respect while she was in respiratory collapse.
Requests she “not allow other patients to use foul or racial language.”
Suggests she promptly treat life-threatening conditions herself.
Forbids her from “abusing UK government services such as Kensington and Chelsea Social Work,” despite being the victim of their abuse.
Requires her to “not cause any disturbance” to patients — while she herself was denied care.
In short: a non-medically trained mother, struggling to breathe, was expected to enforce hospital order, protect fellow patients, and obey institutional delusions — all while her oxygen was 44%.
II. Why It’s Absurd
This document reads less like a safeguarding measure and more like an NHS-themed sketch from Yes, Minister, drafted by someone who’s never seen an asthma attack but is quite fond of clipboards. It turns medical failure into behavioural reprimand — shifting blame to the patient to cover for inexcusable neglect.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because this is the poster child of procedural retaliation.
Instead of acknowledging that Polly was misdiagnosed, denied oxygen, and subsequently attacked by another patient — the Trust deflected with a written behavioural code. A clinical institution weaponised tone policing to avoid accountability for clinical failure.
This agreement is not a boundary — it is a distraction from respiratory collapse. It mischaracterises medical events to manufacture compliance.
IV. SWANK’s Position
Any hospital that confuses respiratory distress with behavioural misconduct, and then writes up the patient instead of checking the oximeter, has no business safeguarding children, families, or its own staff.
We file what others ignore. And this document — this embarrassing institutional note-to-self — is now in the archive.
“I will promptly treat life threatening medical conditions…”
– Guy’s & St Thomas’ to a gasping mother, 2024(Reminder: that’s your job.)
⟡ 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.