“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 safeguarding fatigue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label safeguarding fatigue. Show all posts

The Appointment That Didn’t Happen — But Still Hurt: How Absence Became Another Form of Retaliation


⟡ “I’m Tired of Being Bothered While I’m Sick” ⟡
A Procedural Failure, A Disability Violation, A Pattern in a Sentence

Filed: 10 January 2025
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/EMAIL-05
📎 Download PDF – 2025-01-10_SWANK_Email_KirstyHornal_NoShow_DisabilityDisregard.pdf
Brief but critical email noting a missed visit by Kirsty Hornal, documenting failure to respect health status and contact boundaries during a documented period of medical vulnerability.

I. What Happened

On 9 January 2025, Polly Chromatic sent an email to solicitor Laura Savage and social worker Kirsty Hornal stating, plainly: “Social worker didn’t show up today. I’m tired of being bothered while I’m sick.”

No meeting occurred. No explanation was offered.
Yet the inconvenience of being stood up was compounded by the invasiveness of unwanted contact — during an ongoing medical crisis, and after multiple adjustment notices had already been sent.

It was a line. It was crossed. Then it was documented.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • A procedural absence by the state: scheduled meeting missed, no accountability

  • A verbal disability violation: contact imposed despite prior refusals

  • Health disregard: illness acknowledged, but not accommodated

  • Failure to repair or apologise: silence as institutional habit

  • Escalation context: This occurred during ongoing safeguarding pressure

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because not showing up is not neutrality. It is abandonment — and when it happens repeatedly, it becomes part of the abuse.

This message is short because Polly Chromatic was sick. And that is the point.

SWANK logged it not for its length, but for its implication: that procedural authority can harass even when it does nothing — especially when it was already told to stop.

IV. SWANK’s Position

This wasn’t an isolated failure.
It was a thread in a woven pattern of disrespect.

We do not accept that missed appointments mean missed accountability.
We do not accept that illness justifies silence from professionals who cause it.
We will document every no-show that was preceded by coercion — and followed by nothing.

⟡ 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.


No comments:

The Email They Forgot to Receive: And the Evidence That Vanished Without a Trace


⟡ “I’m Not Responding Since No One Responded to Me for a Year” ⟡
The Email That Was Forwarded — and the Evidence That Wasn’t

Filed: 10 January 2025
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/EMAIL-08
📎 Download PDF – 2025-01-10_SWANK_Email_KirstyHornal_AttachmentFailure_TelecomNeglectEvidence.pdf
Forwarded email documenting a missed visit, declared withdrawal of engagement, and an implied attachment failure — sent to legal, medical, and local authority contacts.

I. What Happened

On 9 January 2025, Polly Chromatic forwarded her “No show” message regarding Kirsty Hornal to solicitor Laura Savage, GP Philip Reid, and others. The message reiterated her exhaustion: “I’m not responding to emails since no one responded to mine for a full year.”

The attachment, implied in the subject and message context, appears to have failed — either technically or procedurally. The intended telecom evidence never arrived.

This document logs not just the failed visit, but the administrative void that followed: failed responses, failed attachments, failed concern.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • Reiterated withdrawal of consent following extended neglect

  • Failed submission of supporting telecom documentation

  • Procedural vacuum — when even evidence delivery is compromised

  • Silence met with further administrative opacity

  • Institutional patterns where emotional exhaustion becomes functional disengagement

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because not all silences are accidental — and not all technical failures are meaningless.

This file marks a moment where truth was attempted, again — and again ignored or lost. Whether through email failure or institutional avoidance, the result was the same: a record unacknowledged, a complaint unmet, and a disabled mother forced to repeat herself across multiple jurisdictions just to say she was tired.

SWANK logs it because in systems like these, even forwarding an email becomes an act of resistance.

IV. SWANK’s Position

This was not a tech glitch. It was a structural echo.

We do not accept that medical exhaustion must be sent multiple times to be acknowledged.
We do not accept that missing attachments erase institutional duty.
We will document every attempt to be heard — even when it didn’t land.

⟡ 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.


No comments:

Documented Obsessions