⟡ Ongoing Trauma, Medical Neglect, and Racial Safeguarding Harm ⟡
Filed under Velvet Retaliation & Statutory Indignation
Metadata
Filed: 8 July 2025
Reference Code: SWANK/N1/ADDENDUM/0725-08
Court File Name: 2025-07-08_Addendum_N1Claim_Discrimination_Trauma_MedicalNeglect.pdf
Summary:
A civil addendum evidencing medical neglect, racial erasure, and a decade-long pattern of trauma inflicted by Westminster and RBKC social workers.
I. What Happened
After over a decade of racially-coded intrusion, Westminster Children’s Services and RBKC have continued to enforce contact with social workers Kirsty Hornal and Sam Brown — both named in my £88 million civil claim and public judicial filings.
Despite being furnished with psychiatric reports, cultural safeguarding requests, and documented objections, the Local Authority escalated its coercive strategies, dismissing documented trauma, dismantling homeschooling stability, and interrupting critical asthma care.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
This submission establishes:
Repeated racial and disability-based failures to accommodate
Medical neglect via cancelled appointments and obstructed care
Escalating trauma to both parent and child through state-led contact
Disregard for Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 and basic clinical ethics
It underscores how the continued involvement of named social workers represents not only a personal retraumatisation, but a structural act of procedural violence against a medically fragile, culturally marginalised family.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
SWANK London Ltd. logged this to record a pattern of:
Public sector racial indifference
Cultural erasure masked as safeguarding
Chronic disbelief in asthma diagnoses despite hospital corroboration
The deliberate weaponisation of social work contact to suppress legal opposition
This is not oversight. It is institutional sabotage disguised as child protection.
IV. Violations
Public Sector Equality Duty (Equality Act 2010, s.149)
Failure to accommodate known psychiatric disability
Retaliation against civil litigant and complainant
Medical interference and negligence
Procedural bias and safeguarding misuse
V. SWANK’s Position
SWANK considers the persistent use of Kirsty Hornal and Sam Brown — despite formal psychiatric diagnosis, written objections, and litigation disclosures — to be an act of coercive malpractice. Both professionals should be removed from all contact with the family and struck from any case bearing judicial neutrality.
If contact must occur, it must be non-social-worker led, independent of Westminster and RBKC, and culturally appropriate. Anything less constitutes complicity in trauma propagation.