In re: The Asthmatic Distress of Bureaucratic Air

---

⟡ The Medical Neglect Telegram II ⟡

Filed: 8 October 2025
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/MEDICAL-NEGLECT
Download: 2025-10-08_SWANK_EmergencyNotification_Westminster_AsthmaCrisis.pdf
Summary: Formal emergency alert to Westminster Children’s Services reporting respiratory distress and unmanaged asthma in a child under local authority care.

---

I. What Happened

At supervised contact on 8 October 2025, the Director measured her son King Bonnee Annee Simlett’s peak-flow at 160 L/min, down from his normal 360 L/min, with a pulse of 104 bpm and visible respiratory exhaustion.

The foster carers, acting under Westminster’s authority, failed to recognise or respond to this clinical crisis.
No ambulance was called, and no physician was consulted.

The Director therefore filed a formal emergency notification to Westminster, the Metropolitan Police, and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, asserting medical neglect and requesting immediate A&E intervention.

---

II. What the Document Establishes

• A verified clinical reading evidencing respiratory distress in a child with chronic asthma.

• Failure of safeguarding duty by carers and caseworkers despite clear danger.

• Multi-agency escalation: The message was copied to all relevant oversight bodies including NHS Trust safeguarding, Ofsted, Social Work England, and the Family Court.

• Correct legal basis: Communication issued under the Equality Act 2010 and pursuant to injunction order M03CL193, restricting all contact to director@swanklondon.com.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because oxygen, like justice, should not depend on bureaucracy.
This entry records not just a medical crisis but a systems failure in real time — where every professional copied bore statutory duty and yet none replied.
SWANK archives this moment as both evidence and indictment: the email that begged an empire to breathe.

---

IV. Violations Cited

• Children Act 1989 §22(3) – failure to safeguard and promote welfare.

• Children Act 1989 §47 – failure to investigate risk of significant harm.

• Equality Act 2010 §20 – failure to accommodate disability-related communication.

• UK GDPR Article 5(1)(f) – unlawful handling of personal data contrary to injunction.

• NHS Safeguarding Policy (2019) – failure to act on clinical warning signs.

---

V. SWANK’s Position

SWANK London Ltd. regards this emergency notification as an unanswered summons of duty.
Each copied recipient is now bound to the record by their silence.
When a child’s lungs become a legal exhibit, the question is no longer “Who failed?” but “Who read and did nothing?”

This file remains open until verified confirmation of medical intervention is received.
Every breath unacknowledged is a paragraph unwritten.

---

Filed by: Polly Chromatic
Founder & Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 37, 2 Porchester Gardens, London W2 6JL
director@swanklondon.com

---

⚖️ 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.

In re: The Persistent Breathlessness of Bureaucracy

---

⟡ The Medical Neglect Telegram ⟡

Filed: 8 October 2025
Reference: SWANK/POLICE/WELFARE-KING
PDF: 2025-10-08_SWANK_FollowUp_MetPolice_WelfareKing.pdf
Summary: Follow-up to Police Report BCA-74770-25-0101-IR, demanding immediate medical intervention for a child in respiratory distress under Westminster’s supervision.

---

I. What Happened

During supervised contact on 8 October 2025, the Director recorded her son Kingdom (aged 11) in visible respiratory distress:

• Peak-flow: 160 L/min (normal 360 L/min)

• Pulse: 104 bpm

• Symptoms: Coughing, rapid breathing, exhaustion

Despite the reading’s clinical urgency, no medical review was arranged by Westminster Children’s Services or its contracted carers.

A police report was filed through the Metropolitan Police Single Online Home portal (Ref: BCA-74770-25-0101-IR), followed by a formal email request for a welfare check and A&E admission.

---

II. What the Document Establishes

• Documented medical risk: Quantified respiratory data evidencing unmanaged asthma.

• Procedural omission: Foster carers and social-work staff failed to initiate emergency response.

• Active oversight escalation: Police, hospital, U.S. consular authorities, and multiple statutory recipients were copied—creating multi-agency accountability.

• Accessibility compliance: Written communication invoked Equality Act 2010 reasonable-adjustment provisions due to vocal-cord impairment.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because a child’s breath should never depend on bureaucratic permission slips.
This filing demonstrates the paradox of “safeguarding” systems that cannot safeguard without being reminded by their victims.

---

IV. Violations Cited

• Children Act 1989 §47 – failure to investigate risk of significant harm.

• Equality Act 2010 §20-21 – failure to accommodate disability-related communication needs.

• UK GDPR Art. 5(1)(f) – unauthorised use of personal email addresses despite injunction order M03CL193.

---

V. SWANK’s Position

When a child gasps, everyone copied on that email inherits the legal and moral duty to respond.
SWANK London Ltd. regards this correspondence as a standing notice of potential corporate and institutional negligence.
Each non-reply extends the evidentiary chain of culpability.

---

Filed by: Polly Chromatic
Founder & Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 37, 2 Porchester Gardens, London W2 6JL
director@swanklondon.com

---

⚖️ 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.

Disability Ignored, Empathy Denied: A Report from the Respiratory Front Lines

 🗓️ 4 January 2024

SWANK Blog Title: A Birthday, A Breach, and a Breathless System
Labels: asthma emergency, medical neglect, racial projection, safeguarding misuse, police escalation, emotional abuse, child rights, disability discrimination, St Thomas misconduct, COVID diagnosis

---

A Birthday, A Breach, and a Breathless System

💨 Filed under: Respiratory Crisis, Institutional Misconduct, and the Failure of Empathy

On the second of January 2024, I made the rational and collaborative decision with my children to attend A&E—not out of drama, but due to the small matter of my lungs not working. That night, I was wheezing, dizzy, and down ten kilograms from prolonged illness. Heir, my youngest, chose to accompany me.

We arrived at St Thomas’ A&E—or as it appeared that night, a dystopian social experiment in overpopulation and collapse. We were ushered into the Majors waiting area—an architectural simulation of empathy failure. Humans were crammed, strewn, breathing each other’s pathogens at close range. We tried not to step on anyone. We failed.

Despite my clear and documented history of eosinophilic asthma, a nurse—resentful for reasons that remain medically unexplained—suggested I might just be having an “asthma thing.” I politely corrected her. She offered a nebuliser. We sat. Then we were displaced. Then called again. Then told to wait. I stumbled over a foot in the crush of the neglected. For that, I was soon verbally attacked by a woman whose rage was racialised, misdirected, and endorsed by the environment.

And then the accusation came—the eternal bait: abuse. A common technique used by low-quality humans to deflect their own lack of emotional regulation. A nurse took me and Heir into a side room—not to treat my breathing—but to interrogate me about my children.

I could barely speak, but I kept asking for medical treatment. Instead, they sent police to our hotel room.

We left. Heir and I returned to our hotel. I cried. We had only just arrived when officers, again, appeared at the door. For what offence? “Leaving” A&E. Apparently leaving without treatment is now criminal.

They came back. Then more of them. Nine, at one point. One officer said my condition "wouldn’t be fixed in one night anyway"—a remarkable position from someone neither medical nor kind. Eventually, a woman officer told me I would not be arrested. She also told me: "I have no concerns about your children."

It was 4am when the police left.

Then it was my son Prerogative’s birthday.

🎈 We went bowling. We had cake. Balloons. We sang. The hotel staff helped. But amidst the celebration, more messages from social workers. Even after all this. Even when I’d said: not today. Even when I could barely breathe.

So we returned to a different hospital: Chelsea and Westminster. There, they confirmed what anyone with compassion or clinical training should have known days earlier—I had COVID. My lungs needed help. They gave me prednisone. And peace.

But the damage had been done.
By St Thomas.
By the police.
By the social workers who circle like vultures instead of healers.

I changed my number.
I do not want calls.
I cannot speak.
I reserve my voice for my children—those who listen.
The rest can learn to write.

—

This is not a story of bad luck. It is a story of institutional design.
Designed to punish, not protect.
To escalate, not resolve.
To make asking for help feel like betrayal of oneself.

And I won’t betray myself anymore.

—
Curated for the SWANK Archive by Polly Chromatic
www.swankarchive.com

How a Mother’s Medical Emergency Became a Pretext for State Intrusion

 🚨 SWANK Dispatch: I Was Nearly Dead — They Called My Kids Orphans and Searched My House

🗓️ 18 October 2021

Filed Under: medical trauma, asthma emergency, unlawful search, child interrogation, disability discrimination, intellectual exploitation, emergency protocol abuse, family rights violation, safeguarding weaponisation, Grand Turk misconduct

---

“I was in respiratory collapse.
The police arrived asking if I’d eaten.
Then they called my children orphans,
searched my house,
and grilled my 12-year-old
while I was nearly in a coma.”
— A Mother Taken by Ambulance While Her Children Were Traumatised by the State

---

This formal letter from Polly Chromatic to attorney Mark Fulford outlines a devastating series of human rights violations following a medical emergency on 14–15 October 2021. While Polly was suffering a life-threatening asthma attack, social workers and police used her absence to invade her home, interrogate her children, insult her husband, and threaten family separation.

---

🧬 I. A Medical Crisis, Not a Crime Scene

• Noelle, in severe respiratory distress, was taken by ambulance after nebuliser treatments failed

• Police arrived without masks, asking irrelevant questions about food while she was unable to breathe

• Children watched in horror as their mother was stretchered away

---

🧑‍👦 II. What the State Did to Her Family

• Called her children "orphans" while she was alive and receiving care

• Referred to the father as unfit, despite his intellectual disability and efforts to cooperate

• Searched the house without permission, with no adult present

• Removed children and forced them to ride alone with a social worker without explanation

• Fed them allergens, worsening their asthma

• Asked irrelevant, psychological questions like:

  • “Do you bathe?”

  • “Do you like your mom?”

  • “Do you like being homeschooled?”

• All this while failing to ask if they were okay or offer any reassurance

---

🚫 III. Abuse of Power Under Medical Pretext

“They forced their way into my hospital room. They violated every boundary. And they tried to turn a crisis into a case.”

The social worker and officers treated the kitchen counter — not the emergency — as the priority.
Rather than assist, they chose to investigate, punish, and traumatise.

---

⚖️ IV. What Noelle Demands

• Restraining order against the Department of Social Development

• Compensation for years of state-inflicted trauma

• Legal action against both the social worker (Miss Godet) and police (Officer Taylor and others)

• Public accountability for the violation of medical ethics, legal rights, and child protection principles

---

SWANK Summary:

She couldn’t breathe.
They couldn’t care.

She was fighting for her life.
They were planning how to punish her for surviving.

---