Showing posts with label Psychiatric Misuse. Show all posts

Chromatic v The Investigatory Loop: On the Psychiatric Repackaging of Justified Emotion

🪞SWANK LOG ENTRY

The Anxiety Inquiry That Was Never Theirs to Make

Or, A Psychiatric Report That Wasn't Ready — But the Diagnosis of the System Was

Filed: 19 November 2024
Reference Code: SWK-MH-RETALIATION-2024-11
PDF Filename: 2024-11-19_SWANK_Letter_Westminster_AnxietyPsychReportMisuse.pdf
One-Line Summary: Polly Chromatic clarifies — yet again — that her anxiety is not a pathology, but a response to ten years of institutional harassment.

I. What Happened

On 19 November 2024, Polly Chromatic sent an email to Westminster and RBKC, requesting the psychiatric report prior to an upcoming meeting — but, more critically, dismantling the repeated attempt to pathologise her emotional response to injustice.

Her tone was direct. Her position was final:

“I don’t have anxiety.
I have anxiety when people keep bullying and harassing me for ten years for no damn reason.”

The psychiatric report wasn’t late — it was irrelevant. The problem is not her mind. It’s their behaviour.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

This email exposes the full procedural irony of the safeguarding industry:

They harass, then diagnose the effects of the harassment.
They gaslight, then pathologise the resistance.
They traumatise, then cite the trauma as proof of risk.

The logic is circular, the evidence is absent, and the process is reputationally bankrupt.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because “anyone would be pissed off” is not an outburst — it’s a perfectly rational footnote to ten years of procedural violence.

Because Westminster continues to commission psychiatric reports as if they’re instruments of clarity, when in fact they are tools of avoidance.

Because Polly does not suffer from a disorder. She suffers from the proximity of professionals who refuse to self-reflect.

This email, like the others, is part of the evidentiary mural: a coherent, articulate refusal to be misdiagnosed by those who cannot diagnose themselves.

IV. Violations

Equality Act 2010 – Psychiatric scrutiny without basis, rooted in disability dismissal
Human Rights Act – Article 8 & Article 3 – Intrusive, degrading assessments
Safeguarding Misuse – Recasting grief and resistance as “mental instability”
Discriminatory Retaliation – Ten years of trauma cited as reason for more
Neglect of Parental Rights – Time wasted, reputations distorted, childhoods lost

V. SWANK’s Position

This email is not a refusal to participate — it is an insistence on integrity.

We consider it a constitutional rejection of psychiatric retaliation dressed in the robes of protection.

To say “I’m anxious when you harass me” is not a symptom — it’s a sentence, and it’s true.

Let the record show: Polly Chromatic has been asking for one thing since the beginning — to be left alone to mother in peace.
And every time she tries, they prescribe her outrage as illness.

We file this to remind the record: grief is not a diagnosis. Harassment is not care. And psychiatry is not a fig leaf for procedural guilt.

⚖️ Legal Rights & Archival Footer This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected. This document does not contain confidential family court material. It contains the lawful submissions, filings, and lived experiences of a party to multiple legal proceedings — including civil claims, safeguarding audits, and formal complaints. All references to professionals are strictly in their public roles and relate to conduct already raised in litigation. This is not a breach of privacy. It is the preservation of truth. Protected under Article 10 of the ECHR, Section 12 of the Human Rights Act, and all applicable rights to freedom of expression, legal self-representation, and public interest disclosure. 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. It is a legal-aesthetic instrument. Filed with velvet contempt. Preserved for future litigation. Because evidence deserves elegance, retaliation deserves an archive, and writing is how I survive this pain. Attempts to silence or intimidate this author will be documented and filed in accordance with SWANK protocols. © 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.

A Chronology of Retaliation Disguised as Welfare: How DSD Failed, Fumbled, and Fabricated

👑 The Name Is Chromatic

On Surnames, Surveillance, and State-Sanctioned Folly

By: Polly Chromatic
(née Noelle Jasmine Meline Bonnee Annee Simlett, but not if I can help it)
📍 Grand Turk / Providenciales / London
🕰 Dated: 9 January 2020

🖋 I. Regarding Names, Misnamings, and Institutional Clumsiness

Let us begin where all bureaucracy fumbles first: identity.

My full legal name—infelicitously recorded—is Noelle Jasmine Meline Bonnee Annee Simlett.
“Bonnee Annee” is misspelled on my husband’s adoption certificate. It ought to be Bonneannee.
“Simlett” belongs to my husband’s stepfather and plays no meaningful role in my personhood.
I do not use either. Neither should you.
We intend to correct this grave aesthetic and legal oversight by legally adopting the surname Bonneannee, a name as unapologetically French as our standards.

🏚 II. Duke Street: A Study in Neighbourly Malice

November 2016 – November 2017

Our residency on Duke Street was marred by the theatrical villainy of one Brian Haegney, who declared (publicly and repeatedly) his wish to have my children “taken away.”
He succeeded in summoning the state: Ashley Adams Forbes responded on 23 May 2017 with references to “many occasions” of physical abuse.
There were no such occasions.
I have never physically punished my children. Not once. Not ever.
Fabrication, however, was clearly in season.

🏥 III. The May 2017 Examination: A Display of Barbarism

Following Brian's fables, I—along with my mother and children—was forcibly escorted to Grand Turk National Hospital.
My sons were subjected to genital examinations in the presence of nine seated adults, who arranged themselves in a semicircle as though attending a gallery opening.
My daughter was not examined at all. One wonders why.
There was no consent. No privacy. No explanation.
I protested. I was shamed for protesting.
My mother witnessed every indignity. We left traumatised. DSD left satisfied.

📵 IV. On the Myth of My Disappearance

Contrary to DSD’s invented difficulties, I have had the same phone number since 2016.
I provided them a timeline that plainly stated we had relocated to Providenciales.
They knew where we were. They simply preferred the fiction.

🛒 V. Brown Houses, Truancy Officers, and the Politics of Grocery Shopping

May 2018

Upon moving to the Brown Houses, I was harassed in the grocery store by Mr. Kennedy, truancy officer and part-time intimidator.
I contacted Ashley Adams Forbes, Mark Garland, and Edgar Howell. Mark responded. Ashley threatened a home visit to inspect my children's notebooks.
No such visit occurred.
I was advised to let it go by our property attorney Andre Malcolm, so I did—like a lady, not a doormat.

🧾 VI. Homeschooling: Authorised and Yet Persecuted

I spoke to Mark Garland in June 2017. He formally approved me to homeschool.
DSD was informed—directly and explicitly.
Therefore, any report about my children “being out during school hours” in 2018 is not just irrelevant, it is publicly embarrassing for those who made it.

🧱 VII. Palm Grove, Petty Neighbours, and Nonsensical Allegations

August 2019

Allegations emerged: drug use, nudity, dirty children. (I assure you: only the last one is true, and blessedly so.)
The report coincides precisely with a verbal altercation involving my neighbour Jenny and her fence-builder John, a man who:
- Attempted to punch me through a fence.
- Threatened to kill me.
- Complained that my house “should be torn down.”
If children being barefoot in their own yard offends someone, the problem is with their worldview, not my parenting.

💉 VIII. Vaccinations and Surveillance by Stethoscope

My children are vaccinated. In the USA, UK, and TCI. Try to keep up.
The report that we were “unvaccinated” came one day after I privately discussed vaccines on the phone with my mother. Someone had clearly been eavesdropping.
Romeo’s cheek bandage was from treating a cherry angioma, not trauma.
The wart plasters I used worked better than the prescription.
The doctor declared all children in good health. So why was a Care Plan initiated?
We were left at the hospital without transport or explanation.

🧠 IX. The Psychiatric Farce

I have no mental health diagnosis.
I disclosed eosinophilic asthma—a medical condition, not a psychiatric one.
Mental health officers were sent anyway. They asked if the trampoline was for the kids and whether we wore shoes outdoors.
No reports, no diagnoses, no explanations. Just... bureaucrats in sandals.

📌 X. The Paper Trail of Nothingness

Ashley Forbes now declares that a “current investigation” continues.
Into what, exactly?
- Medical professionals reported no concerns.
- My documentation is exhaustive.
- DSD refused to meet my attorney, Lara.
They claim I am uncooperative. Yet the silence, avoidance, and evasion are all theirs.

📎 XI. Demands, Non-Negotiable

I hereby demand:

Full access to all records and reports made by DSD against me.
Disclosure of every justification offered for:
- The 2017 genital inspections.
- The 2019 hospital visit.
- The so-called Care Plan that no one has seen.
A formal acknowledgement that no Care Plan was ever agreed, signed, or explained.

🕯 Final Observation

This is no longer about safeguarding. It is about face-saving.

A decade of harassment, neighbourly vendettas, misapplied protocols, and fabricated crises—designed not to protect children, but to punish a woman who refuses to grovel.

If DSD remains “involved,” it is not because of need. It is because they cannot admit error.

⟡ 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.

Standards & Whinges Against Negligent Kingdoms (SWANK London Ltd.)

Recently Tried in the Court of Public Opinion