“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 RBKC procedural abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RBKC procedural abuse. Show all posts

A Referral Was Made. It Was Addressed. So They Made It Again.


⟡ SWANK Archive: The Referral That Looped into Madness ⟡

8–18 February 2024

The Pattern Is the System, Not the Mother.

I. Opening Salvo: A Referral Based on Nothing New

Chelsea & Westminster Hospital made a redundant referral concerning the 2 January 2024 incident at St Thomas’ Hospital—an event already disclosed and documented.

On 8 February 2024, RBKC social worker Samira Issa emailed Polly Chromatic requesting a phone call.

“I was hoping we could discuss this over the phone.”

Polly’s response was swift, documented, and legally grounded:

“Please refrain from contacting me again... I cannot communicate via phone... I am disgusted with your continued harassment.”

She confirmed:

  • Legal representation had been retained

  • A formal harassment complaint had already been filed

II. The Cycle Repeats—While They Claim It Doesn’t

9 February 2024
Samira responds:

“I have read [your previous emails] all.”
“Would you be able to meet with me in person?”

She claims the referral concerns a “separate incident”, yet provides no new information.

The tactics remain unchanged:

  • Verbal coercion disguised as support

  • Asthma-based communication boundaries ignored

  • Pretending written refusals are unclear

Polly replies again:

“Nothing new has happened and I do not have time.”
“Call a lawyer.”

III. The Surveillance Visit, and the Escalation by Samira

By 13 February, Samira admits to an unauthorised visit:

“We visited your last known address to see if you and the children were residing there.”

A refusal to speak becomes grounds for home surveillance.
No legal threshold. No due cause. No warning.

Then she asks:

“Can you confirm where you are currently living?”

Despite already knowing.
Despite having just been there.
Despite violating trust and triggering retraumatisation.

IV. The Legal Yet Exhausting Closure

18 February 2024
Polly responds:

“We will be available at 4pm Wednesday 21st February.”

This is not consent.
It is closure by exhaustion.
The location was provided. The file was closed—again.

This was never a safeguarding concern.
This was a reputation-maintenance ritual.


© SWANK London Ltd. All Patterns Reserved.
When a system can’t hear “no” in writing, it’s not protecting—it’s performing.

Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy


No comments:

If You Can’t Postpone the Meeting, You’d Better Write Down Why

 📎 SWANK Dispatch: The Mapping Document Is Not a Weapon

🗓️ 29 February 2024

Filed Under: legal rights ignored, social worker coercion, Mapping Document misconduct, disability discrimination, GP treatment delay, safeguarding misuse, procedural weaponisation, RBKC escalation, Samira Issa misconduct

“The only part of the Mapping Document
you’ve completed so far
is the timeline
of your own negligence.”
— Polly Chromatic, writing under legal and clinical instruction

This letter, dated 29 February 2024, was written by Polly Chromatic to Samira Issa, requesting a legal and medically justified postponement of a pending child protection meeting.

Polly’s lawyer and GP both supported the request, citing:

  • Her need for hospital treatment and aftercare

  • The requirement that Samira fill out her section of the Mapping Document first, per procedural fairness

  • The legal necessity of written explanation if postponement was to be refused

Samira had, up to that point, refused to provide justification for forcing a meeting on a parent who was medically unwell and legally advised to delay.

🧾 SWANK Commentary

When a mother is
breathless, bedridden,
and backed by both a lawyer and GP —

but still
you hand her a form and a threat —
you’re no longer safeguarding children.
You’re performing power.

And performance has no place
in child protection.


No comments:

Documented Obsessions