“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 clinical inaction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clinical inaction. Show all posts

Safeguarding Meant Staying Silent — So He Did



⟡ The GP Who Refused to Reply While I Couldn’t Breathe ⟡

Filed: 21 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/GMC/2025-REID-COMPLAINT
📎 Download PDF — 2025-05-21_SWANK_GMC_Complaint_DrPhilipReid_DisabilityNeglect_Abandonment_SafeguardingRetaliation.pdf


I. Not an Omission. A Decision to Abandon.

This complaint to the General Medical Council (GMC) documents a period of calculated silence from Dr Philip Reid, a GP who:

  • Was informed of a medically certified written-only communication adjustment

  • Was aware of ongoing trauma-induced respiratory collapse

  • Was notified of active safeguarding misuse and retaliation

  • And chose to offer no intervention, no safeguarding referral, no record of care

This wasn’t oversight.
It was a professional refusal to act when action was the bare minimum.


II. When “Primary Care” Refuses to Care

The submitted evidence outlines:

  • Failure to respond to documented updates

  • Ignorance of pre-established disability status

  • No coordination with safeguarding bodies despite knowledge of procedural retaliation

  • And a pattern of institutional loyalty over patient protection

In Reid’s case, silence wasn’t neutrality.
It was allegiance to the abusive machinery.

He was the GP on file.
But he served the file, not the patient.


III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because doctors are not permitted to recuse themselves when patients are inconvenient.
Because safeguarding cannot be weaponised without complicity from those who remain “neutral.”
Because the refusal to act in the face of procedural violence is an ethical breach, not a scheduling error.

Let the record show:

  • The GP was informed

  • The diagnosis was clear

  • The adjustment was lawful

  • The need was urgent

  • And SWANK — filed the breach before the breath gave out


IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not believe that silence is a medical strategy.
We do not permit regulatory professionals to ghost their ethical obligations.
We do not consider trauma-informed care optional when trauma is state-administered.

Let the record show:

The GP stayed quiet.
The retaliation escalated.
The patient declined.
And SWANK — issued the indictment with timestamps attached.

This is not a complaint about poor service.
It is a clinical abandonment report, typed in oxygen and evidence.




.



Documented Obsessions