“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Showing posts with label ICB complaint. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ICB complaint. Show all posts

A GP With a Silence Problem.


⟡ SWANK Medical Complicity Archive ⟡

“He Refused to Speak in Writing. So I Filed It Publicly.”
Filed: May 2025
Reference: SWANK/ICB/PEMBRIDGE/REID-DISCRIMINATION
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05_SWANK_ICB_Complaint_PembridgeSurgery_DisabilityDiscrimination_MedicalNeglect_Reid.pdf

I. Your GP Is Not Exempt from Human Rights.

This complaint, lodged with the North West London Integrated Care Board (ICB), concerns Dr. Philip Reid of Pembridge Villas Surgery — a clinician who responded to a documented communication disability by ignoring it completely.

Not once.
Not ambiguously.
But repeatedly — and in writing.

The result?

  • Health deterioration

  • Institutional cover

  • And a GP who knew the truth and stayed quiet anyway

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • Dr. Reid was personally informed, both verbally (when possible) and in writing, that the patient:

    • Lives with muscle dysphonia and PTSD from medical intrusion

    • Cannot speak safely during exacerbation of eosinophilic asthma

    • Has a clinically documented written-only adjustment (see: Dr. Raaiq, Nov 2024)

  • He:

    • Ignored every letter

    • Permitted verbal-only channels to remain dominant

    • Refused to respond to urgent queries, including safeguarding misuse and prescription errors

    • Operated in complicity with known retaliatory safeguarding actions by Westminster Council

This was not a boundary issue.

It was medical cowardice framed as neutrality.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because too many GPs believe that silence is safe.
That by doing nothing, they can’t be blamed.

We filed this because:

  • Neglect isn’t passive

  • Refusal to write is refusal to care

  • And ICB oversight does not protect clinicians from patient archives anymore

This isn’t about a missed referral.
It’s about a doctor who watched safeguarding abuse unfold and said nothing.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not permit primary care to become primary complicity.
We do not accept referrals built on silence and evasion.
We do not redact the names of those who knew — and chose inaction.

Let the record show:

The GP was notified.
The adjustment was cited.
The complaint was filed.
And now — the public knows.

This wasn’t a communication failure.
It was a strategic silence.
And SWANK has now filed the reply he refused to write.

⟡ 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.


No comments:

The GP Ignored My Adjustment and Helped Them Retaliate. — This Is What Primary Care Looks Like When It’s Political


⟡ Formal GP Complaint Filed with North West London ICB ⟡

“When a GP denies medical adjustments, falsifies records, and triggers safeguarding in response — it’s not care. It’s collusion.”

Filed: 2 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/ICB/GP-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-02_SWANK_ICB_Complaint_PembridgeVillas_DisabilityDiscrimination_AdjustmentBreach.pdf
A formal complaint to North West London Integrated Care Board regarding disability discrimination and clinical retaliation by Dr. Philip Reid of Pembridge Villas Surgery. The complaint cites failure to honour medical adjustments, diagnostic manipulation, and complicity in multi-agency safeguarding abuse.

I. What Happened

On 2 June 2025, Polly Chromatic, on behalf of Noelle Jasmine Meline Bonnee Annee Simlett, submitted a complaint to the North West London ICB, asserting:

  • Refusal to implement a written-only medical adjustment, in violation of UK law

  • Clinical mischaracterisation of eosinophilic asthma and muscle dysphonia

  • Contribution to retaliatory safeguarding escalation after legal filings

  • Violation of medical ethics, disability law, and GP contractual duties

  • Harm to a disabled mother and four children through access obstruction and systemic deferral

This filing follows:

  • Direct complaints to the GMC, EHRC, NHS complaints system, ICO, and PHSO

  • A £23M civil claim and active Judicial Review

  • A documented pattern of primary care misuse as retaliatory administration

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That primary care is not exempt from scrutiny — especially when it harms by omission

  • That GPs can become instruments of retaliation when clinical negligence serves institutional goals

  • That written adjustments are not optional — and denial is a breach, not a misunderstanding

  • That the ICB is now on formal notice of the harm — and of its legal significance

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because GP collusion often hides behind slow paperwork and passive notes.
Because what happened was not an error — it was a pattern.
Because when your surgery becomes a gatekeeper to harm, you file the lock, the key, and the one who handed it over.

This isn’t a patient grievance.
It’s a legal record.
And now, it’s part of the archive.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept GP practices that obscure harm under clinical softness.
We do not accept the denial of access disguised as administrative inertia.
We do not accept that medical retaliation should go unchallenged because it’s local.

SWANK London Ltd. affirms:
If your doctor joins the retaliation,
We name them.
If your adjustment is ignored,
We file the breach.
And if safeguarding is triggered from a consultation,
We archive the prescription — for harm.

⟡ 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.


No comments:

Documented Obsessions