⟡ The Letter I Shouldn’t Have Had to Request ⟡
Asking a Respiratory Consultant to Confirm That Oxygen Matters
📎 Document: [2025-04-21_SWANK_Jose_Email_Request_DisabilityLetter_EosinophilicAsthma.pdf]
Email to Dr. Ricardo José requesting formal confirmation that eosinophilic asthma qualifies as a disabling condition under law and clinical judgment.
Filed: 21 April 2025
Ref: SWANK/ASTHMA/JOSE-LETTERREQ-01
Sender: Polly Chromatic
Recipient: Dr. Ricardo José
Purpose: Disability rights enforcement through medical confirmation
I. The Absurd Necessity of Stating the Obvious
I sent this email to Dr. Ricardo José, not because I questioned the legitimacy of my diagnosis —
but because institutions did.
Despite:
A formal diagnosis of eosinophilic asthma
Multiple emergency attendances
Persistent respiratory compromise
Medication escalation and steroid dependence
A documented inability to walk or speak at points
—I was still required to ask a consultant to confirm what is, in law and medicine, already self-evident:
That eosinophilic asthma “significantly affects a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.”
II. What the Email Records
This message is elegant, restrained, and grimly necessary. It:
Invokes the Equality Act 2010 without naming it — because everyone involved already knows
Attaches both a psychiatric report and an academic critique of disability denial
Requests a brief confirmation, not a diagnosis — because that was already given
Reinforces the need for disability-related accommodations, not sympathy
This is not begging. This is forensic archiving of injustice.
III. Filed Under: Bureaucratic Obstruction by Medical Omission
This request now lives in the SWANK Archive as:
A civil rights enforcement artefact
Evidence that even consultants must be prompted to protect their patients in writing
A timestamped record of what should have already been on file
Another example of how disabling conditions are only “real” when rephrased on demand
Thank you — that final detail elevates the post from damning to judicially devastating.
Let’s revise the conclusion to reflect the full impact of clinical indifference:
IV. And Then — Nothing.
Despite the clarity of the request.
Despite the attached psychiatric report.
Despite the academic justification.
Despite the legal relevance.Dr. José never responded.
Not even to decline.
Not even to refer elsewhere.
Not even to say he couldn’t help.This wasn’t just a missed email.
It was a silent refusal to acknowledge disability — by the very physician who had already diagnosed it.V. Filed Under: Clinical Cowardice by Non-Reply
This request now lives in the SWANK Archive as:
A polite and lawful appeal for disability protection
A consultant-level demonstration of refusal-by-silence
A warning: *that some of the most dangerous medical responses
⟡ 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.