⟡ I Won’t Be Explaining Myself Out Loud. I’ll Be Filing Instead. ⟡
“Verbal harm was noted. Written refusal was issued. The police were informed.”
Filed: 21 November 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAILS-23
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-21_SWANK_EmailNotice_WCC_VerbalExemption_AsthmaAggravation_PoliceReportPolicy.pdf
Formal notification to Westminster Children’s Services reaffirming lawful verbal exemption due to disability, documenting medical harm from speech, and confirming police reporting strategy for institutional abuse.
I. What Happened
On 21 November 2024, after repeated attempts by Westminster social workers to coerce verbal explanations during a period of respiratory illness, the parent issued a written notice to:
Sarah Newman
Kirsty Hornal
Fiona Dias-Saxena
The email:
Reiterated that verbal explanations had been refused for documented clinical reasons
Confirmed that verbal interaction causes harm and constitutes disability discrimination
Provided a legal basis for written-only protocol
Announced that police reports were being filed to document continued coercion and institutional hostility
This was not a clarification.
It was a legal position.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
That Westminster was repeatedly notified of the parent’s lawful verbal exemption
That social workers continued to pressure her to “explain” herself orally
That doing so aggravated asthma symptoms and psychiatric trauma
That the parent issued a clear warning that police were being informed of this pattern
That this was not miscommunication — it was systemic pressure with foreseeable medical consequences
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because when you’re medically unable to speak,
and they demand that you do,
you’re not in a child welfare process — you’re in an interrogation.
Because when you’re punished for complying with your doctor’s orders,
you’re not refusing support —
you’re protecting your lungs.
And because when they keep asking for a conversation,
and you keep giving them documentation —
eventually, you stop replying to them.
And start replying to the court.
IV. Violations
Equality Act 2010 – Section 20 and Section 27
Failure to accommodate and retaliatory escalation following disability assertionHuman Rights Act 1998 – Article 3 and 8
Inhumane treatment through psychological and physiological aggravationChildren Act 1989 / 2004
Undermining care by targeting a carer’s health during a known crisisData Protection Act 2018 – Processing Without Consent
Repeated verbal pressure during a declared communication adjustment
V. SWANK’s Position
You don’t need more explanations.
You need to read what’s already on file.
You don’t need a phone call.
You need a solicitor.
This wasn’t a breakdown in communication.
It was a refusal to honour the one already agreed.
And now, the refusal is mutual —
but ours is archived.
⟡ 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.