⟡ FORMAL COMPLAINT – GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL ⟡
Filed: 21 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/GMC/REID-FTPR-2025
Download PDF: 2025-05-21_Core_PC-114_GMC_ComplaintDrReid.pdf
Summary: Formal complaint to the General Medical Council (GMC) regarding the misconduct of Dr. Philip Reid, a primary care physician in the Westminster area. The complaint identifies deliberate misrepresentation of medical records, failure to uphold disability accommodations, and complicity in procedural harassment by local authorities.
I. What Happened
On 21 May 2025, Polly Chromatic (legally Noelle Bonnee Annee Simlett) submitted a formal complaint to the GMC, outlining professional and ethical breaches by Dr. Philip Reid.
The complaint details three primary violations:
Failure to Intervene During Known Harassment
Despite being repeatedly informed of harassment by social workers and its impact on her health, Dr. Reid failed to intervene or escalate concerns. His inaction facilitated further institutional harm, breaching the medical duty of protection.Failure to Uphold Disability Adjustment
Although the patient had a confirmed written-only communication adjustment due to eosinophilic asthma, PTSD, and muscle tension dysphonia, Dr. Reid continued to engage with safeguarding processes that ignored this requirement, endangering both medical safety and procedural fairness.Misrepresentation of a Child’s Medical Condition
After receiving clinical documentation confirming that the patient’s son (Prince) was diagnosed with asthma, Dr. Reid informed social workers that the child “does not have asthma.” This falsehood appeared in the PLO letterused against the family — a fabricated medical narrative weaponised in legal proceedings.
II. What the Document Establishes
• That Dr. Reid breached the GMC’s ethical and professional standards by falsifying or misrepresenting information.
• That his refusal to uphold a disability accommodation constitutes direct discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
• That his conduct enabled the procedural persecution of a disabled patient and her children.
• That this is not clinical error but ethical abandonment.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
• To document the intersection between medical negligence and safeguarding abuse.
• To ensure the GMC receives an evidentiary trail proving collusion between clinical actors and social services.
• To preserve this complaint as a key artifact in the SWANK Medical Misconduct Archive.
• Because when doctors become narrators of falsehood, archives must become clinics of truth.
IV. Legal & Ethical Framework
Professional Standards – GMC (2024)
• Good Medical Practice – honesty, transparency, accuracy in medical documentation.
• Equality & Diversity Duties – accommodation for disability in all patient interaction.
• Safeguarding Obligations – protection of vulnerable patients and families from institutional harm.
Statutory Context
• Equality Act 2010, ss.15, 19, 20 – discrimination and failure to accommodate.
• Data Protection Act 2018, s.171 – accuracy and lawful processing of medical information.
• Human Rights Act 1998, Arts. 3, 6, 8 – protection from degrading treatment, denial of fair process, and interference with family life.
V. SWANK’s Position
“When a doctor rewrites health as fiction, the body becomes bureaucracy.”
SWANK London Ltd. holds that Dr. Philip Reid’s conduct represents the quiet collapse of medical ethics under administrative pressure.
His inaction, misrepresentation, and complicity have transfigured medical care into procedural harm.
This complaint is not only a call for accountability — it is the reclamation of narrative authority by the patient herself.
What medicine erased, documentation restores.
⟡ This Entry Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected.
This is not a blog. This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with deliberate punctuation, preserved for litigation and education.
Because ethics deserve enforcement.
And medicine deserves mirrors.