“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 disability adjustment ignored. Show all posts
Showing posts with label disability adjustment ignored. Show all posts

The Interview Was the Violation


⟡ Who Let Ben in the Room? Drayton Park’s Safeguarding Theatre ⟡

Filed: 15 November 2022
Reference: SWANK/EDUCATION/DRAYTON-BREACH
📎 Download PDF — 2022-11-15_SWANK_Letter_DraytonPark_ChildInterview_ConsentBreach_SafeguardingMisconduct.pdf

I. The Interview Was the Violation

This letter, issued formally to Drayton Park Primary School, records the parent’s legal and procedural objection to the unsanctioned interviewing of minor children by:

  • An unknown male staff member,

  • Operating without prior disclosure,

  • In the context of a fabricated safeguarding concern,

  • Under false pretences of educational support.

The child was startled.
The parent was excluded.
The trust was obliterated.
The “safeguarding” was theatre — performed without script or consent.

II. What They Did. What They Should Never Have Tried.

  • No notification before the interview

  • No documentation of parental consent

  • No disability adjustments respected

  • No adherence to trauma-informed safeguarding practice

This was not a meeting.
It was an extraction — performed with institutional stagecraft and pastel deception.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because safeguarding is not a loophole for intrusion.
Because unfamiliar men do not belong in closed rooms with startled children.
Because institutional performance cannot override documented parental refusal.

Let the record show:

  • The boundary was crossed

  • The procedure was unregulated

  • The staff were unaccountable

  • And SWANK — filed the rupture with timestamped contempt

This is not educational support.
It is evidentiary malpractice in a classroom costume.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept retroactive justification for inappropriate contact.
We do not permit fabricated concerns to create legal access to children.
We do not redact the names of schools that used safeguarding to sidestep consent.

Let the record show:

The children were startled.
The mother was silent — by medical necessity.
The system interpreted that as permission.
And SWANK — interpreted it as misconduct.

This isn’t safeguarding.
It’s unauthorised access via institutional ruse.




No comments:

Documented Obsessions