⟡ On the Coexistence of Anaesthesia and Basic Coordination ⟡
Filed: 16 February 2026
Reference: SWANK/CFC/PC00696
Download PDF: 2026-01-01_PC00696_ScheduledSurgery_PeakFlowMonitoring.pdf
Summary: A courteous request that two weeks of required pre-operative asthma monitoring for Kingdom be treated as operationally significant before anaesthesia is administered.
I. The Clinical Plot
Kingdom has scheduled surgery on 21 January 2026.
The hospital, in an almost touching display of medical prudence, has requested two weeks of peak flow readings in advance due to:
• Anaesthesia
• Respiratory history
• The deeply unfashionable reality that breathing matters
This requirement was not framed as decorative.
It was framed as necessary to safely proceed.
II. The Administrative Question
The correspondence therefore asked four restrained questions:
Who is named responsible for ensuring daily peak flow readings are taken?
How will monitoring be coordinated across placements and contact?
How will the readings be transmitted for submission to the surgical team?
Where is the peak flow meter currently located?
In summary:
Who has the lungs?
Who has the device?
Who has the pen?
And who is ensuring Kingdom remains operable?
III. The Avant-Garde Concept of Writing Numbers Down
Peak flow monitoring requires:
• Daily measurement
• Daily recording
• Continuity
• The mild discipline of consistency
It is not a philosophical exercise.
It is a number, written down, repeatedly.
And yet, without ownership, even numbers drift.
IV. The Risk of Administrative Improvisation
The email did not accuse.
It merely observed that without accurate two-week monitoring, surgery may be delayed or cancelled.
And nothing elevates governance like postponing clinically necessary surgery because no one could confirm who held the peak flow meter.
Continuity in this context is not cosmetic.
It is pulmonary.
V. SWANK’s Position
This is not anxiety. It is oxygen management.
• If surgery is scheduled, monitoring must precede it.
• If monitoring is required, responsibility must be named.
• If anaesthesia is planned, improvisation is inadvisable.
The correspondence did not escalate.
It simply insisted that respiration be treated as administratively relevant.
Finale
No melodrama.
No raised voices.
Only the quiet proposition that when preparing to sedate a child with respiratory history,
the most revolutionary act is basic coordination.
Because occasionally,
the difference between cancellation and surgery
is not legal argument.
It is a number written down every day.
© 2026 SWANK London LLC
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.