I’m Efficient. You’re Defensive.

---

🖋 SWANK Dispatch | 24 November 2024
IF YOU CAN’T TAKE EMAILS, YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE A JOB.

Filed From: Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
Author: Polly Chromatic
Filed Under: Rejection of Access · Email Suppression · Institutional Weakness · Police Intolerance · Psychologist Avoidance · Writing as Breathing · Telepathic Preference

---

✉️ THE EMAIL THAT WAS “TOO MUCH” FOR PROFESSIONALS:

“I’m having a hard time reading written communication from anyone because I’m met with rejection so often and it’s traumatising and heartbreaking for me.”
“Such as the mental health centre and psychologist and police responding by telling me to stop emailing them when I’m trying to explain my perspective in the best way I can without compromising my ability to talk and breathe.”
“I can’t explain all of this verbally repeatedly and I can’t email each person and explain it repeatedly either because I have four kids to homeschool and care for and I have to also work.”
“I have to be as efficient as possible.”

This is not a tantrum.
It is a compressed survival dispatch.

---

🧠 INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES, TRANSLATED:

🙉 “Please stop emailing us.”
🙈 “We’re too overwhelmed to read.”
🙊 “Just talk to us—never mind your lungs.”

---

🧬 ACCESS STATEMENT (WHICH YOU CONTINUE TO VIOLATE):

“I suffer from a disability which makes speaking verbally difficult. I prefer to communicate telepathically to minimise respiratory strain; however, email is fine.”

If email causes you stress,
you should not be in public service.
Because disability access is not a lifestyle request—
it is a legal right.

---

📝 FINAL NOTE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF Inbox Fragility:

I write to preserve breath.
You recoil from formatting.
I email to streamline survival.
You call it excessive.

If you cannot cope with correspondence,
step away from other people’s lives.

---

Polly Chromatic
Reading, writing, resisting. Efficient despite you.
📍 Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
🌐 www.swankarchive.com

---

No Assessment Because No One Adjusted — And Kirsty Was CC’d

---

⟡ “No One Was Smart Enough to Make an Adjustment — So We Filed.” ⟡

Polly Chromatic Forwards Health-Based Communication Barrier to Kirsty Hornal and Legal Counsel — Revealing Early Ignorance of Disability Adjustments

Filed: 27 December 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-04
📎 Download PDF – 2024-12-27_SWANK_Email_KirstyHornal_ReasonableAdjustment_RefusalToAccommodate.pdf
Summary: Forwarded email trail showing Polly Chromatic explaining her verbal disability to Westminster and Harley Street clinicians, with Kirsty Hornal copied — establishing early awareness of adjustments.

---

I. What Happened

On 27 December 2024, Polly Chromatic forwarded an email thread to Nannette Nicholson showing:

– That on 10 December 2024, she requested a refund from Harley Street Mental Health due to adjustment refusal
– That she clearly disclosed her disability, stating:

“I suffer from a disability which makes speaking verbally difficult... I prefer to communicate telepathically to minimise respiratory strain; however, email is fine.”
– That Kirsty Hornal was cc’d
– That the assessment was blocked due to reception staff refusing to relay written information to a psychiatrist
– That legal counsel Laura Savage (Merali Beedle) was also included in the thread

---

II. What the Record Establishes

• Kirsty Hornal was given early direct knowledge of Polly’s verbal communication disability
• The adjustment was requested in clear, plain language
• Psychiatric harm and care obstruction were communicated and documented
• No safeguarding support or accommodation followed — only escalation
• Westminster can no longer claim lack of notice regarding disability needs

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because saying “I cannot speak” is a medical disclosure — not a rhetorical inconvenience.
Because forwarding this to Kirsty and Laura Savage proved the system knew — and still failed.
Because when adjustments are ignored, the archive must not be.

SWANK logs the request that came before the retaliation. Every time.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that disability must be restated after its first refusal.
We do not accept that psychiatric care can be denied for being written.
We do not accept that professionals can read this and claim they didn’t know.

This wasn’t an email. It was a disability disclosure.
And SWANK will file it until the silence is struck from the record.

---

⟡ 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.

When Care Became Coordination — and the Patient Wasn't Invited

---

⟡ SWANK Psychological Gatekeeping Archive ⟡
“She Listened. She Smiled. Then She Called a Social Worker.”
Filed: 30 May 2024
Reference: SWANK/LIZWHITE/ASSESSMENT-DISCONTINUED-01
📎 Download PDF – 2024-05-30_SWANK_LizWhite_Assessment_SocialServicesAnxiety_Record.pdf
Author: Polly Chromatic

---

I. One Hour in Harley Street, Then the Floor Fell Out

Before I found Dr Rafiq, I sat — barely breathing — in the polished stillness of a Harley Street office, speaking to Dr Liz White.

I explained the trauma.
The pattern of harassment.
The physical toll of stress-induced asthma.
And the panic that came every time a letter or knock signaled another institutional ambush.

She listened.
She nodded.
She looked sympathetic.

Then she called Edward Kendall, my social worker — without my consent, without warning, without delay.

And he told her something I had never been told:
That the reason for social services involvement was “domestic violence.”

It wasn’t written in any referral.
No one had informed me.
She found out before I did.

Then — having acquired a narrative from the state, not the patient — Dr White ended the relationship.

She refused to treat me.
No follow-up. No continuity. Just a link to anxiety worksheets and a distant suggestion that someone else might help.

---

II. What the Document Proves

• That I sought support in good faith

• That my oxygen levels had fallen to 44%, yet the hospital claimed “intoxication”

• That my children (then 12 and 14) were falsely described as “left alone”

• That my ex-partner lives thousands of miles away — yet I alone was targeted

• That Dr White responded not with care, but with escalation and exit

And after all this?

I didn’t just feel dismissed.

I experienced severe panic attacks — episodes so intense they left me debilitated for days.
The betrayal was not abstract. It was physiological.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because psychological betrayal wears credentials.
Because therapeutic abandonment isn’t always brutal — sometimes, it’s clinically polite.
Because what looks like neutrality can be devastatingly aligned.

We filed this because:

• Seeking help should not lead to state surveillance

• Panic should not be rewarded with procedural ghosting

• And psychologists should not quietly reinforce the system the patient came to escape

Let the record show:

She did not mishear.
She did not misunderstand.
She simply made a call — and walked away.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept consultants who outsource discomfort to social services.
We do not accept “support” that dissolves upon contact with real institutional critique.
We do not accept silence as an appropriate clinical conclusion to distress.

Let the record show:

The panic was real.
The abandonment was professional.
And SWANK — is what remains when the clinician leaves.

This wasn’t care.
It was clinical cowardice in a cashmere wrap —
and we are thankful to Dr White,
not for the help, but for the honesty of her exit.

---

⟡ 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.