You Didn’t Just Ignore My Asthma. You Rewrote It.

---

⟡ SWANK Medical Endangerment Archive ⟡

“I Left to Breathe. They Wrote That I Was Removed.”
Filed: 23 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/GSTT/AE-SECURITY-FALSEHOOD-2024
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-23_SWANK_GSTT_Complaint_AENurse_DisabilityDiscrimination_SecurityFalsehood_2Jan2024.pdf

---

I. The Asthma Was Real. The Removal Was Not.

This complaint, issued formally to Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, concerns an acute asthma incidenton 2 January 2024 — and the nurse who chose protocol over breath.

You arrived in respiratory crisis.
You requested written-only communication.
You disclosed eosinophilic asthma.
You were met with verbal insistence and refusal.

And when you left — for safety, for oxygen, for survival —

they filed it as a removal.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

• Your diagnosis (eosinophilic asthma + muscle dysphonia) requires non-verbal interaction during attacks

• The nurse on duty:

  • Refused written interaction

  • Withheld basic triage adjustments

  • Endangered your respiratory stability

• Upon your lawful exit from the facility:

  • A formal note was fabricated, claiming removal by security

  • This narrative was used to shield negligence and preempt complaint

• The complaint demands:

  • Formal correction of the clinical record

  • Disciplinary review

  • Disability training

  • And, if not received, escalation to the CQC, EHRC, and legal review

This was not miscommunication.

It was respiratory negligence rewritten into defiance.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because too often, a disabled woman leaving a building is treated not as a medical act, but an affront to control.

We filed this because:

• You weren’t “removed.”

• You weren’t disruptive.

• You were endangered — and then recharacterised to protect the nurse, not the patient.

Let the record show:

• You requested adjustment.

• You were ignored.

• You left voluntarily.

• And now, the hospital’s lie is filed, annotated, and archived.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept life-threatening treatment written over with fiction.
We do not accept respiratory needs interpreted as rudeness.
We do not tolerate false claims of removal by institutions desperate to obscure liability.

Let the record show:

The patient left.
The record lied.
The complaint was signed.
And SWANK — has published the correction.

This wasn’t a disruption.
It was self-rescue rebranded as rebellion.

---

⟡ 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.

---

The Verbal Refusal of a Breathless Witness

 🖋 𝒮𝒲𝒜𝒩𝒦 Dispatch | 21 November 2024

“𝒩𝑜, 𝐼 𝒲𝑜𝓃’𝓉 𝒜𝓇𝑔𝓊𝑒. 𝐼’𝓁𝓁 𝒜𝓇𝒸𝒽𝒾𝓋𝑒 𝒴𝑜𝓊.”

Filed Under: Verbal Abuse, A&E Misconduct, NHS Deflection, Respiratory Retaliation, SWANK London Ltd

—

“I do not waste my time arguing with people.”

That sentence should be engraved in hospital corridors.

Not because I can’t argue,
but because I no longer perform for systems that weaponise disbelief.

“They either want to help or they don’t.”

And when they don’t?
I don’t escalate. I document.
Because a sovereign woman does not plead for what is hers by right.

“If they don’t want to help, I document it online and move on.”

That’s not passive.
That’s public record management.

“I cannot speak verbally to argue or explain things, period.”

Let me simplify for the NHS:
Verbal interaction is not a diagnostic requirement.
It’s a privileged assumption.

“They bully me every time we have a respiratory issue and don’t believe me.”

You call it triage.
We call it institutional gaslighting with a lanyard.

“My asthma is much worse now because of that ignorant doctor.”

So I won’t argue.
I’ll type. I’ll timestamp. I’ll make the archive louder than your excuses.

—

📍 Typed With Restraint. Published With Precision.
𝒫𝑜𝓁𝓁𝓎 𝒞𝒽𝓇𝑜𝓂𝒶𝓉𝒾𝒸, Oxygen Strategist, Institutional Historian

📧 director@swanklondon.com
🌐 www.swanklondon.com
© SWANK London Ltd. All Escalations Digitised.

—

Labels: A&E bullying, asthma exacerbation, verbal ableism, refusal of care, safeguarding distortion, SWANK witness report

—

Search Description:
Mother refuses verbal conflict in A&E due to asthma. Documents NHS bullying and disbelief. Respiratory impact worsened. Institutional response recorded.

Breathless Is Not Unreasonable: How NHS Staff Abuse Disabled Families, Then Call Them Difficult

---

⟡ “I Don’t Fight Like a Wild Animal. I Email Until You Lose Your Job.” ⟡
Medical Neglect, Hospital Misconduct, and the Anatomy of Verbal Retaliation When You Can’t Breathe

Filed: 23 November 2024
Reference: SWANK/NHS/EMAIL-03
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-23_SWANK_Email_Reid_NHSMisconduct_ChildNeglectThreatReport.pdf
Email documenting abusive NHS conduct toward disabled parent and children, failed A&E procedures, and verbal disability assertion — with a formal threat to escalate publicly and legally.

---

I. What Happened

On 23 November 2024, Polly Chromatic sent a structured, blistering email to GP Philip Reid and a group of social services and legal recipients. It contained:

• Dosage and health updates for multiple children (prednisone use)

• Observations about neglectful NHS staff who mishandled intake tests

• First-hand documentation of emotional and physical abuse in A&E settings

• A written refusal to continue tolerating hospital-based maltreatment

When King’s lungs were visibly struggling, the staff told him to “breathe with his mouth closed,” and took his temperature by placing the device beside — not in — his ear.

And when Polly complained, they accused her of racism.

This was not a meltdown. It was a case file.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

• Repeated NHS neglect of a disabled parent and her children

• Mistreatment framed as clinical policy, not bias

• Weaponised accusations (racism, non-compliance) used to deflect accountability

• Disability dismissal: severe asthma and verbal impairment treated as irritants

• Verbal retaliation criminalised, while institutional abuse remained protected

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because what gets called an “angry email” is often a legal archive in its purest form.

This message is strategic, evidentiary, and fully aware of the consequences. It does not plead — it indicts. Every sentence is an affidavit in disguise. Every word is a rebuttal to the fantasy that “reasonable” patients get treated fairly.

SWANK logged it because no parent should have to diagnose their own child while defending their legal right not to suffocate in silence.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

This was not aggression.
It was survival, forwarded.

We do not accept that hospitals can fail four children and then ask for politeness.
We do not accept that accusations of racism erase acts of clinical cruelty.
We will document every time a parent was forced to write their own discharge summary because the state refused to care.

---

⟡ 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.