I’m High Risk, Not High Drama — Leave Me Alone So I Can Breathe

 📮 SWANK Dispatch: My Asthma Is Not a Crime — But Your Harassment Might Be

🗓️ 30 June 2020

Filed Under: asthma discrimination, shielding violation, health harassment, false accusations, community hostility, pandemic vulnerability, NHS guidance ignored, public health failure, legal retaliation

---

“My diagnosis is severe eosinophilic asthma.
Not ‘difficult mother.’ Not ‘suspicious parent.’
Just: a person who cannot survive your ignorance.”
— A Mother Documenting Medical Fact as Legal Shield

---

This sharply articulated letter by Polly Chromatic, addressed to the Department of Social Development, is not merely a declaration of illness — it is a legally grounded plea for respect, space, and air.

It outlines her decades-long history with a life-threatening medical condition — severe eosinophilic asthma — and how local hostility, institutional ignorance, and social work overreach have placed her and her children at risk.

---

🧾 I. The Medical Facts Are Not Up for Debate

From the NHS (UK) and CDC (USA):

• Polly is clinically extremely vulnerable (high risk)

• She is on continuous oral steroids (prednisone)

• Shielding guidance includes:

  • No uninvited visitors

  • Avoidance of all triggers (disinfectants, perfumes, stress, smoke, etc.)

  • Calm environments essential for asthma control

---

⚠️ II. What the Department Has Done Instead

• Ignored shielding protocol

• Repeatedly allowed false child abuse allegations based on lifestyle accommodations (no smoking, no toxic products, etc.)

• Permitted harassment from neighbours who resist her boundaries

• Created stressful encounters with social workers and truancy officers during a global respiratory pandemic

• Continued to operate in a way that increases her risk of hospitalisation or death

---

🧠 III. Clarifying the Actual Issue

This is not about parenting.
This is not about truancy.
This is not about attitude.

This is about:

• Medical discrimination

• Public misunderstanding of asthma

• Systemic punishment of individuals who enforce their own health boundaries

• Abuse of statutory resources to pursue false claims while ignoring medical law

---

📌 Final Point:

“False allegations of child abuse are a crime.”

And so is ignoring a medically documented need for safety.
This letter doesn’t ask for sympathy.
It demands legal and ethical conduct — with the evidence attached.

---

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 Sewer Gas Was Visible. The Accountability Was Not.

---

⟡ “The Gas Was Real. The Duty, They Say, Was Not.” ⟡

RBKC Reiterates Its Refusal to Accept Liability for a Prolonged Sewer Gas Leak, Claiming No Statutory Duty Despite Known Risk to Health

Filed: 11 March 2025
Reference: SWANK/RBKC/EMAIL-07
📎 Download PDF – 2025-03-11_SWANK_Email_RBKC_Morrone_LiabilityDenial_SewerGasHazard_ElginCrescent.pdf
Summary: Giuseppe Morrone reasserts RBKC’s legal position denying all liability for prolonged sewer gas exposure, stating the Council has “powers, not duties,” and instructs Polly Chromatic to sue the landlord instead.

---

I. What Happened

On 11 March 2025 at 9:47 AM, RBKC’s Senior Principal Insurance Officer Giuseppe Morrone responded to Polly Chromatic’s statutory complaint regarding a severe sewer gas leak at Flat E, 37 Elgin Crescent. His response:

– Reasserted the Council’s denial of liability
– Claimed that statutory powers under housing law do not imply a duty
– Advised Polly to pursue her landlord in court
– Clarified that this denial applies specifically to financial losses
– Referred all further concerns to the RBKC Complaints team, despite their Stage 1 closure
– Explained that unless solicitors are appointed, the claim will default to CCMCC via DCP

---

II. What the Record Establishes

• The Council maintains a legal firewall around its failure to intervene
• Despite the severity of a toxic sewer gas leak, RBKC refuses to accept responsibility
• The strategy is clear: deny duty, deflect liability, and refer back to internal departments
• It provides explicit confirmation that your next legal action must bypass DCP unless RBKC appoints legal counsel
• It creates a procedural paper trail of official refusal despite life-threatening exposure

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because the difference between “power” and “duty” is a legal trick with medical consequences.
Because telling a disabled mother to chase her landlord through court while sewer gas poisons her home is not safeguarding — it’s abandonment.
Because this is the moment the Council said: we won’t stop it, and we won’t pay for it.

SWANK archives every denial that let the poison linger.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that environmental poisoning is exempt from accountability.
We do not accept that duty vanishes just because legal responsibility is inconvenient.
We do not accept that sewage in the air is someone else’s problem — when you’re the Council.

This wasn’t a response. It was a refusal in legal costume.
And SWANK will file every paragraph they used to delay relief.

---

⟡ 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.