Showing posts with label home intrusion. Show all posts

The Visit Was a Performance: A Theatre of Concern in Four Acts

SWANK Complaint Dispatch

The Spectacle of Safeguarding: When Social Work Becomes Family Surveillance Theatre

Filed: 25 February 2024

Labels: Institutional Gaslighting, Safeguarding Misconduct, Home Intrusion, Parental Surveillance, Cross-Borough Overreach, RBKC Theatre, Video Evidence Included

💌 Welcome to SWANK
An Archive of ✦ Elegance, ✦ Complaint, ✦ and Unapologetic Standards
from a Mother Harassed by the State in Two Countries for Over a Decade.

The Incident at 2 Porchester Gardens

A Visit from Samira (and her mother)

On 21 February 2024, Samira Issa, a social worker for Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, turned up unannounced to my home outside her jurisdiction—in Westminster—with her unidentified mother in tow. This was supposedly in response to a safeguarding referral from Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, citing vague “erratic behaviour” and “intoxication” during an asthma emergency.

🪞 Except—there was no erratic behaviour.
There was no intoxication.
And Samira refused to speak during the entire visit. Her mother spoke instead. A woman I’ve never met. Never been introduced to.

They did not ask about the hospital concerns.
They questioned my children about homeschooling.
They came not to assess risk—but to perform a state theatre of surveillance.

🎥 I documented the entire interaction. The footage is archived here:

📼 And here’s the original audio from the hospital visit that triggered their retaliatory referral:

Westminster & Chelsea Hospital, 4 Feb 2024

Timeline of Email Evidence:

From 8 February – 21 February 2024, I was repeatedly harassed via email while acutely ill with asthma. Despite documented communication disabilities, they insisted on verbal meetings. Despite previous social work closures, they claimed “new concerns”—which were in fact recycled allegations from hospital staff who are now under complaint.

I clearly stated:
✦ I was ill.
✦ I could not speak.
✦ I had legal representation.
✦ I was filing a complaint.

And yet they came.
Not to help—but to surveil.
Not to assess—but to stage compliance.

My Formal Complaint to Glen Peache

Director of Family Services at RBKC

I have notified:
✦ Local Safeguarding Children Partnership advisors
✦ Senior NHS officials
✦ Detective Chief Inspectors
✦ Lead nurses and safeguarding heads
✦ Cabinet Members for Children’s Services
✦ Headteachers of schools never attended

Because this is not a mistake.
It is a patterned misuse of power,
disguised as care.

✷ Final Word

When social work masquerades as protection, but functions as punishment, it is no longer a public service—it is a public harm.

I do not comply with performative safeguarding.
I do not consent to unlawful visits.
And I do not remain silent while my children are interrogated
for being educated, loved, and safe—in a home the state cannot control.

Filed under: False Referral Retaliation, Safeguarding as Surveillance, Cross-Borough Misconduct, Homeschool Harassment, State Overreach

You Invited Yourselves Into My Home—And Called It Concern

🖋️ ⟡ SWANK Politeness Obituary ⟡

20 February 2024

Politeness Withdrawn. Respect Declared Non-Reciprocal.

I. Respect and Kindness Are Not Institutional Habits

In this 15:32 iPhone missive, Polly Chromatic addresses Samira Issa, Eric Wedge-Bull, and Glen Peache with the composure only a violated woman of reason can sustain. Bcc’d, naturally, to Nannette Nicholson for public memory.

She writes:

“I don’t appreciate being forced to have humans in my home whom I do not trust and whom have treated me disrespectfully.”
“Additionally, I don’t appreciate being bothered while I am sick.”

This is not a request.
It is a post-mortem of institutional etiquette.

II. When You’ve Been Too Polite for Too Long

Noelle continues:

“I realise that you don’t care and that you don’t understand how to treat humans with kindness and respect.”

A line functioning both as diagnosis and closure.
A sentence worthy of social work training manuals under:

“Why Families Withdraw.”

She ends with:

“Thank you for your understanding.”

An exquisite final stroke — snide, formal, and true.

III. This Was Not a Letter. It Was a Ritual Revocation of Access

Polly was sick.
Her trust was broken.
Her home was entered.
Her tone remained regal.

This is how you close a door —
elegantly, and with no keys left inside.

Polly Chromatic
Founder & Director, SWANK London Ltd
London W2
✉ director@swanklondon.com
🌐 www.swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy

COVID, Compost Toilets, and Unscheduled Surveillance

📦 SWANK Dispatch: Social Workers Visited During Lunch — Left With Our Dignity in Ruins

🗓️ 26 March 2020

Filed Under: pandemic intrusion, social worker harassment, homeschooling disruption, public health breach, unannounced visits, meal interference, institutional gaslighting, disrespectful oversight

“They asked what my compost toilet was.
They didn’t ask how my daughter was after crying from being disrupted mid-nurse.”
— A Mother Whose Home Was a Classroom, Not a Crime Scene

This formal letter, dated 26 March 2020, was addressed to the Department of Social Development by Polly Chromatic, after yet another unannounced, ill-timed, and legally questionable home intrusion by social workers in the midst of the emerging COVID-19 crisis.

Let us be perfectly clear:

This was during a global pandemic.
She was cooking lunch for her four children.
There was no safeguarding emergency.
They gave her 15 minutes’ notice.

🦠 I. Coronavirus? Not Their Concern.

While the rest of the world was locked down, distancing, and masked, the social workers:

• Showed up unannounced
• Washed their hands — but wore no masks
• Breathed across a home mid-mealtime
• Brought no information about the virus, no aid, no public health literature
• Added only stress

Noelle:

“It was extremely shocking to me that social workers of all people would put my family at risk at such a time.”

🏠 II. Every Object Was an Interrogation

They asked:

“What is that?” (about the compost toilet)
“What is that?” (about the ballet barre)
“What is that?” (about cat food on the floor)
“How is school going?” (during a pandemic where all schools were closed)

They ignored:

The education schedule
The house renovation efforts
Her daughter’s crying from interrupted nursing
The lunch that went cold, uneaten

📞 III. Post-Visit Gossip: They Called Her Husband

“It’s extremely disrespectful to meet with me and not say anything about any problems and then call my husband and talk to him about such problems.”

As if she weren’t the parent.
As if she weren’t the educator.
As if she didn’t exist.

✍️ IV. Her Boundary Was Firm, Civil, and Reasonable

“From here on out I need a written report of what needs to be done and a copy of the corresponding regulations for such requests.”

Not because she’s defensive.
Because she’s efficient.
Because she has four children, a book in progress, a business to run, a home to renovate — and no time for random theatre dressed as concern.

The Timeline They Never Expected Her to Keep

⟡ SWANK Early Evidence Archive – TCI ⟡
“It Started With a Fence. It Ended With Seven Home Visits and No Explanation.”
Filed: 1 November 2016
Reference: SWANK/TCI/SOCIALDEV-TIMELINE-ORIGINAL-01
📎 Download PDF – 2016-11-01_SWANK_SocialDevelopment_Harassment_Timeline_Original.pdf
Author: Polly Chromatic

I. The First Document They Hoped Wouldn’t Be Kept

Before the solicitor letters, before the FOIA references, before the phrase “pattern of procedural harassment” had become legally inevitable — there was this.

A personal log.

Handwritten in survival.
Chronological in tone.
Uncompromising in detail.

This is the original timeline of unwanted state interference — recorded not for drama, but for sanity.

II. What This Timeline Captures

The neighbour named Brian who weaponised “concern” into repeated institutional triggers
The forced hospital visit in 2017 that led to invasive examinations of the children — with no medical justification
The social workers who entered without warning
The homeschooling approval that was granted, denied, then conveniently “forgotten”
The seven visits between August 2019 and March 2020
The fence that was taken apart
The mother who was expected to remain calm
The email chains that began to grow
The COVID-19 powers that were ignored entirely

All logged.
All real.
All now permanent.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because no safeguarding protocol requires trespassing and silence.
Because “home visit” sounds neutral until it becomes weekly surveillance.
Because trauma doesn’t need a court order — it only needs repetition.

We filed this because:

Bureaucracies lie in the form of omission
No formal complaint was ever shown
And the mother was always expected to smile, comply, and never document

Let the record show:

She documented everything.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept “investigation” as a lifestyle.
We do not accept safeguarding that begins with silence and ends with fatigue.
We do not accept systems that treat a woman’s credibility as an administrative threat.