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

You Want a Meeting About My Children—but Refuse to Be Recorded Doing It

 ⟡ SWANK Mapping Theatre Dispatch ⟡

28 February 2024


It’s Not a Mapping Session. It’s a Scripted Confessional for the Accused Parent.


Labels: mapping manipulation, non-consensual process, verbal dominance, refusal of recording, institutional mistrust, Royal Brompton medical record, SWANK boundary assertion

—

I. The Mapping Request Wrapped in Pseudo-Therapy
Samira Issa (RBKC Social Worker) writes on 27 February 2024, inviting Noelle to a “mapping meeting” on 1 March at Malton Road Hub.

She frames it as support:

“The purpose of this is to gather your views and feelings in regards to the wellbeing of your children...”

But embedded beneath this faux-therapy language is an unstated demand: submit to verbal vulnerability without evidence of safety or trust.

—

II. Noelle Responds the Next Morning—with Documentation, Not Emotion

At 10:31am on 28 February, she replies with:

  • A medical letter showing current health condition

  • A statement of care from Royal Brompton Hospital

  • A direct instruction:

    “If you wanted my current medical records... the best way to communicate is to ask directly.”

This is not a mother seeking approval. It is an administrative rebuke in health literacy prose.

—

III. The System Responds: No Recordings, No Accountability

At 16:42, Samira writes:

“We do not agree to be recorded... and if we have the sense this [is] being recorded we will terminate the meeting.”

Let’s be clear:

  • They will not state their concerns

  • They do not want their voices archived

  • They only want your testimony, not their own documented process

That is power imbalance by design.

—

IV. When Mapping Becomes Performance

Samira ends by thanking Noelle for her records from 2016—ignoring that her medical issues are ongoing.
She states:

“I hope [your concern about lack of clarity] is something we can clarify in the mapping meeting.”

Translation:
We’ll tell you the charges when you show up. Privately. Off the record.

—

Filed under:
mapping charade, Royal Brompton credibility, recording refusal, safeguarding stagecraft, SWANK email archive, medical gatekeeping, child protection pantomime

© SWANK Archive. All Patterns Reserved. If they won’t be recorded, they know what they’re doing is wrong.

No comments:

Documented Obsessions