⟡ SWANK Final Boundary Dispatch: Verbal Refusal Edition ⟡
9 February 2024
Verbal Communication Is Not Required to Comply with the Law
I. The Simplest Legal Boundary in a System Addicted to Talking
Following Samira Issa’s latest pivot from phone to in-person meeting, Polly Chromatic ends the procedural spiral with seven words that require no further performance:
“I will not speak verbally anywhere.”
Not by phone.
Not in person.
Not for show.
Not for anyone’s comfort.
It is not avoidance.
It is juridical restraint with medical cause.
II. The Pattern Reiterated
Samira’s insistence echoes the systemic refrain:
“A verbal conversation will be beneficial…”
Despite:
Documented asthma
A written-only communication directive
Ongoing solicitor involvement
Repeated refusals lodged in writing
This isn’t care.
It’s ableist coercion by insistence.
III. Assertive Clarity Is the New Formal Protocol
Polly’s refusal isn’t a mood.
It’s a communication doctrine.
Written is not lesser.
Refusal is not defiance.
Silence is not avoidance—it is survival.
She does not need to justify her medical reality every time a new social worker joins the thread.
She says:
“No. Not like that.”
That is the whole sentence.
© SWANK London Ltd. All Patterns Reserved.
Silence is not avoidance—it’s survival. And clarity is the highest form of no.
Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy