⟡ “Guy’s Knew. So Did You.” ⟡
The diagnosis wasn’t hidden. The records weren’t private. The truth was on file — and they acted like it wasn’t there.
Filed: May 2025
Reference: SWANK/GSTT/MEDICAL-EVIDENCE-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-01_SWANK_Evidence_GSTT_DisabilityVerificationBundle.pdf
A complete medical evidence bundle issued by Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust confirming Polly Chromatic’s chronic diagnoses, including Eosinophilic Asthma. The document was already known to Westminster Children’s Services, RBKC, and affiliated safeguarding professionals — and yet, all procedural behaviour acted as if this verification did not exist. This isn’t just clinical proof. It’s archival exposure.
I. What Happened
In May 2025, Polly Chromatic released the full NHS evidence bundle from Guy’s Hospital into the SWANK record. It verifies her medical history, disability classification, and consistent engagement with specialist treatment teams — all of which were known to Westminster at the time they issued safeguarding escalation letters and cited “isolation,” “non-engagement,” or “risk.” This release formalises the medical record. It also removes institutional excuses.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
The NHS had fully diagnosed Polly’s conditions — including Eosinophilic Asthma — and Westminster had access
Safeguarding professionals escalated claims without consulting or acknowledging that medical record
Verifiable limitations (e.g., vocal strain, exhaustion) were ignored or distorted into compliance failure
NHS-provided documents directly contradict the procedural narratives used against the family
The problem was not information — it was institutional dishonesty
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because “we didn’t know” is not a defence when the documents are already in your inbox.
Because you don’t get to weaponise silence when the diagnosis explains it.
Because when the evidence is this clear, and the escalation still happened,
what failed wasn’t communication — it was integrity.
SWANK London Ltd. logged this file not as medical backup, but as the final indictment of institutional misconduct cloaked in concern.
IV. Violations
❍ Equality Act 2010 – Escalation despite known disability and verified medical constraints
❍ Safeguarding Misconduct – Acting against a family with full access to exculpatory medical data
❍ Clinical Negligence – Failure to consult or interpret accessible NHS records
❍ Data Misuse – Withholding or misrepresenting verified diagnoses in procedural contexts
❍ Article 8 ECHR – Disregard for health privacy and bodily autonomy in intervention efforts
V. SWANK’s Position
You knew.
You all knew.
The diagnosis was documented.
The records were public.
The limits were clinical.
And still — you acted like her lungs were attitude.
Like her voice was optional.
Like her asthma was defiance.
Polly Chromatic does not owe institutions an explanation they already had.
She owes them an archive.
And now she has one.
⟡ 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.