⟡ “You Can’t Claim I Was ‘Erratic’ If I Physically Can’t Speak.” ⟡
Email documenting hospital bullying, asthma-related discrimination, and intent to sue for institutional neglect
Filed: 24 November 2024
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER-NHS/HOSPITAL-ABUSE-DISPUTE
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-24_SWANK_Email_HospitalAbuse_LegalThreatAgainstNHS.pdf
Email to WCC officials and legal counsel outlining abuse in A&E settings and declaring intent to pursue legal action over repeated neglect
I. What Happened
On 24 November 2024, Polly Chromatic emailed Westminster social work leadership and her legal team in response to continued hospital bullying and misrepresentation during respiratory crises.
She highlighted that across multiple hospitals — including St Thomas’ and St Mary’s — staff blamed her for the conduct of others, dismissed her communication limitations, and categorised her as "erratic" despite clear evidence that she could not physically speak due to disability.
The message made one thing clear: the problem was not miscommunication — it was systemic contempt for asthma patients, particularly disabled mothers and their children.
Polly concluded her message with a legal warning: “I’m going to sue them. It’s child neglect.”
II. What the Complaint Establishes
Procedural breaches: Repeated denial of asthma treatment; misclassification of disability responses as behaviour
Human impact: Exacerbated respiratory symptoms, trauma to children, destabilised medical routines
Power dynamics: Disabled woman framed as “aggressive” or “erratic” for asserting need for basic medical care
Institutional failure: Failure to de-escalate, accommodate, or interpret documented respiratory limitations
Unacceptable conduct: Hospitals weaponising disbelief and making the patient responsible for clinical dysfunction
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because “I can’t argue” is not hostility — it’s breath preservation.
Because accusing a non-verbal disabled mother of aggression is not just inaccurate — it’s abusive.
Because A&E services that confuse composure with defiance are not safe for anyone with chronic illness.
Because every time a mother with asthma has to email the hospital to correct their version of her silence, something is structurally wrong.
This wasn’t a breakdown in communication.
It was a refusal to recognise silence as legitimate.
IV. Violations
Equality Act 2010, Sections 15 & 20 – discrimination arising from disability; failure to accommodate communication limitations
Children Act 1989, Section 17 – failure to safeguard children's health during acute respiratory episodes
Human Rights Act 1998, Article 3 & 8 – degrading treatment; interference with family life and medical privacy
NHS Constitution, Right to Respect – right to be heard, believed, and treated without humiliation
V. SWANK’s Position
We do not accept that medical disbelief is a diagnosis.
We do not accept that respiratory illness is treated as inconvenience.
We do not accept that child neglect can be redirected toward the mother when it originates from the institution.
This wasn’t mislabelled. It was misused.
And now, it is part of the archive — and the case law.
⟡ 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. © 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved. Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.