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

Showing posts with label asthma endangerment. Show all posts

19 Charges, Zero Reports — The State vs. One Mother With a Voice

📢 SWANK Dispatch: Complaint Filed, System Indicted — A Maladministration Portfolio

🗓️ 1 July 2020

Filed Under: maladministration, forced medical exams, fence dismantling, complaint escalation, racial and philosophical discrimination, policy evasion, procedural breakdown, institutional retraumatisation

“If this is child protection, then tell me: who’s protecting them from you?”
— A Mother with a Legal Mind and an Asthmatic Lung

In this formidable submission to Mrs. Astwood of the Complaints Commission, dated 1 July 2020, Polly Chromatic brings a meticulously itemised formal complaint against the Department of Social Development in Grand Turk.

Not a grievance.
A case file.
Backed by documents, medical records, witness statements, and 19 grounds of maladministration.

Let us recount.

⚖️ I. Charges of Maladministration Include:

Unnecessary delays
Bias
Negligence
Improper procedures
Wrongful decisions
Improper service
Discourtesy
Performance failures
Discrimination (race, sex, age, education, parenting philosophy)
Harassment
Corruption
Abuse of power
Flawed internal processes
No justification for decisions
Lack of humane consideration
Unfairness
Incompetence
Arbitrariness
Mistake of law or fact

No exaggeration.
Each charge is backed by incident.

🔪 II. Physical and Emotional Violations

• May 2017: Her three sons were sexually assaulted on a hospital table by a state-appointed doctor under police and social work supervision.
• August 2019: Her fence was dismantled. Entry forced. No probable cause.
• COVID-19: Social workers entered against Emergency Powers, without masks, with no legal basis, despite her severe asthma.
• September 2019: Social workers hijacked her son’s birthday to interrogate the family over a fabricated vaccination claim.

Not a single one of these incidents was followed up with a report, a review, or an apology.

📚 III. Homeschooling as the Original Sin

Though approved by Mark Garland of the Ministry of Education, her choice to homeschool her children seems to have been the original offence in the eyes of the Department.

What followed was years of:

• Policy shifting
• Approval denial
• Truancy threats
• Investigations without cause

All while she submitted annual curricula, proof of education, and sought transparent cooperation.

🧠 IV. What She Asks for Is Not Vengeance — But Standards

She doesn’t want revenge. She wants:
• Communication
• Appointments
• Reports
• Due process
• Policy compliance
• Respect for her health and boundaries
• Consideration for her children’s dignity

💬 Final Words:

“Your assistance in investigating and resolving this matter would be extremely beneficial for my family as well as the public sphere.”

A citizen wrote a legal document.
A mother documented 3 years of unrelenting injustice.
SWANK now holds the archive.

This Wasn’t a Timeline. It Was a Pattern They Hoped Wouldn’t Be Noticed.

⟡ SWANK Archive Dispatch ⟡

“When the Fence Broke, So Did the Pretence.”
Filed: 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/SOCDEV-TIMELINE
📎 Download PDF – 2020_Timeline_Abuse_Homeschool_TCI_SocialDev.pdf

I. This Is Not a Timeline. This Is a Legal Dissection.

What you see here is not an account.
It is a jurisdictional exhibit —
a dated record of harassment, interference, and respiratory endangerment
delivered beneath the guise of “welfare.”

This timeline details:

Unlawful home intrusions
Forced medical procedures
Safeguarding threats issued with no lawful basis
And the slow, procedural grinding-down of a disabled mother
who asked for nothing but air, autonomy, and a legal education for her children.

II. Pattern Recognition, Weaponised

This isn’t a story.
It’s a format of abuse so common it should be pre-labelled:

Welfare-as-Surveillance. Support-as-Coercion. Discretion-as-Damage.

The events escalate with bureaucratic symmetry:

A complaint filed
A retaliation issued
A welfare worker assigned
A gate breached
A timeline created

What do we call this?

State misconduct disguised as maternal concern.

III. Why SWANK Filed This

Because memory can be erased — but structure cannot.
Because safeguarding is not a blank cheque for harassment.
Because if your gate must be broken, at least the formatting should be flawless.

They surveilled.
They failed to protect.
They called it “support.”
We filed it — and named it abuse.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not believe child welfare agencies are entitled to retaliate for legal resistance.
We do not accept “safeguarding” as a euphemism for surveillance.
We do not publish this out of spite —
we publish it because forgetting is how these systems survive.

Let the record show:

A gate was broken.
A child was endangered.
The asthma returned.
And the Director of SWANK filed everything.

⟡ 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.