🛁 “You Have No Bathroom, Therefore You Must Be Supervised”
⟡ A Fictional Account of Homeschool Neglect Penned by a Social Worker with No Access to Records, Law, or Logic
IN THE MATTER OF: Compost toilets, renovated homes, and the bureaucratic delusion that a mat on the floor is neglect when the children are thriving
⟡ METADATA
Filed: 19 August 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-SOCIALDEV-SUPERVISIONTHREAT
Court File Name: 2020-08-19_SafeguardingNotice_SupervisionThreat_SmithJosephTCI
Summary: This letter from Ashley Smith-Joseph of the Department of Social Development threatens court action unless Polly Chromatic attends a meeting to “discuss concerns” about her children's welfare. These concerns include sleeping on a mat in a shared room, homeschooling, and the use of a composting toilet — all of which had previously been disclosed, explained, or approved. It’s a marvel of bureaucratic repetition, constructed to sound lawful while presenting no evidence of actual harm.
I. What Happened
Polly was accused of failing to provide proper education — despite having formal homeschooling approval from Mark Garland in 2017
She was accused of poor hygiene for using a compost toilet — despite previous medical and court-approved documentation explaining environmental adaptations
The letter acknowledges recent home renovations and improvements, then inexplicably declares them insufficient
It recycles vague “community concerns,” citing no specifics, no incidents, and no reports from professionals
It states that Polly has “not engaged” — despite hundreds of documented communications and submissions over multiple years
It concludes with a threat to seek a Supervision Order if Polly fails to comply — a legal measure that gives the state oversight without formal removal, often used to coerce rather than assist
II. What the Letter Actually Reveals
That Polly’s children were healthy, present, and safe — but the state disapproved of the décor
That Polly was punished for self-sufficiency, including using a compost toilet and managing home renovations
That no actual risk was identified — only aesthetic disapproval and middle-class horror at not having a porcelain toilet
That “lack of engagement” was cited despite full compliance, indicating retaliation for questioning safeguarding power
That no clear threshold was provided for how to satisfy the Department — only that if Polly didn’t attend, they would escalate
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because compost toilets are not abuse. Because educating your own children is not noncompliance. Because sharing a sleeping space is not neglect — especially when your children are safe, nourished, and excelling. Because a state that can’t define “neglect” without referencing paint colour, shared rooms, and homegrown hygiene systems isn’t safeguarding — it’s moralising. And because this letter proves once again that institutional overreach always disguises itself as “concern.”
IV. Violations
Misrepresentation of living conditions to justify escalation
Procedural harassment via vague “community concerns”
Misuse of safeguarding mechanisms to coerce attendance
Failure to acknowledge or document previous approvals and adaptations
Threat of court involvement without statutory threshold
Retaliation for asserting lawful educational autonomy
Mischaracterisation of environmental adaptations as harm
V. SWANK’s Position
We log this letter as Exhibit A in the criminalisation of lawful parenting through aesthetic elitism. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:
That living simply is not neglect — and composting is not abuse
That every parent has the right to homeschool without being punished for it
That children sleeping on a mat together are not at risk — they are a family
That supervision threats are not support — they are control
That this letter contains no lawful threshold — only bureaucratic ego and ignorance