“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 sewer gas retaliation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sewer gas retaliation. Show all posts

She Asked for Safety. They Offered a Sandwich.



⟡ “I Can’t Breathe — But I’m Glad You Got Your Lunch.” ⟡
Disability disclosure met with a sandwich and a smile.

Filed: 24 January 2025
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-30
📎 Download PDF – 2025-01-24_SWANK_Email_KirstyHornal_PanicDisabilityDisclosure_ResponseTone.pdf
A heartbreaking message from the parent — articulating the cause and mechanics of her panic attacks — answered with casual deflection, false warmth, and an offer to “help yourself” to Kirsty’s forgotten groceries. This wasn’t a dialogue. It was a lesson in how institutions perform compassion while ignoring its meaning.


I. What Happened

She explained:
– That panic attacks are triggered by institutional abandonment.
– That she feels unsafe speaking because she’s been reported and punished for it.
– That verbal communication worsens her symptoms, despite her love of talking.
– That this began with the sewer gas incident in October 2023.

She asked for help.
She asked to be read.
And Kirsty said,
“Have a lovely week — and enjoy my lunch.”


II. What the Email Establishes

  • That the parent clearly disclosed panic triggers and verbal disability context

  • That her medical and emotional needs were expressed in direct, reasonable terms

  • That Kirsty Hornal’s reply focused on tone, not substance

  • That her response trivialised the seriousness of the disclosure

  • That an opportunity for meaningful support was reduced to polite optics


III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because disability isn’t cured with courgette salad.
Because saying “no worries” to a panic disclosure is not care — it’s erasure.
Because when someone tells you they can’t breathe,
you don’t change the subject to groceries.
And because archival silence is safer than performative replies.


IV. Violations Identified

  • Failure to Acknowledge Medical Disclosure with Clinical or Procedural Support

  • Emotional Minimisation of Disability-Linked Distress

  • Institutional Tone-Policing in Response to Genuine Distress

  • Dereliction of Duty to Investigate Impact of Prior Environmental Hazard (sewer gas)

  • Continued Retaliatory Impacts Following October 2023 Environmental Incident


V. SWANK’s Position

This wasn’t a moment of kindness.
It was a moment of containment.
She told them she couldn’t talk.
She told them she was scared.
She told them what would help.

And they told her:
Help yourself to lunch.

Now we’re helping ourselves —
to a permanent record.


⟡ 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.

When a Social Worker Brings Her Mum to a Visit, Then Gaslights You into a Conference

 📎 SWANK Dispatch: I Don’t Need Your Support. I Need You to Stop Performing Abuse.

🗓️ 27 February 2024

Filed Under: Section 47 coercion, false safeguarding escalation, RBKC misconduct, Westminster jurisdiction breach, hospital retaliation, institutional surveillance, medical discrimination, refusal of disability accommodations, social worker gaslighting, conference theatre


“You’re not helping.
You’re harming.
And you’re using your job title to disguise it.”

— A Chronically Ill Mother Who Asked for Help and Got a Referral Instead


In this letter, Polly Chromatic directly confronts Samira Issa — the social worker who escalated a false safeguarding concern into a full Initial Child Protection Conference scheduled for 4 March 2024. The letter documents a pattern of:

  • Procedural breaches (including bringing her mother instead of a colleague)

  • Medical dismissal (despite visible disability and documented records)

  • Jurisdictional overreach (Noelle and her children reside in Westminster, not RBKC)

  • And a refusal to acknowledge even the basic communication needs of a disabled parent


📋 I. Highlights of the Letter

  • Polly had been exposed to toxic sewer gas in her flat and denied care by two NHS hospitals

  • She read the letter aloud to avoid the stress of repetition due to respiratory limitations

  • Samira is accused of emotional abuse as defined by the NSPCC:

    • Constant criticism

    • Micromanagement

    • Boundary violations

    • Neglect of stated health needs

    • Persistent hostility


🛑 II. A Refusal Framed as “Support”

“As I have shared with you previously, I am in no need of support from humans who aren’t capable of doing their own job correctly, let alone mine.”
Polly Chromatic

She makes clear:

  • The conference itself is retaliatory theatre

  • She and her sons will attend — on their terms

  • She requests that Samira fill out her own mapping document in the same way Noelle has been asked to

  • And she cites her degrees in Psychology and Human Development, with a concentration in social justice, to frame this not just as personal harm — but as data for her research on institutional abuse


💻 III. Links and Evidence Included


🧾 SWANK Commentary

She asked to write because she couldn’t breathe.
You pushed her to speak.
She sent medical records.
You asked questions she already answered.
She provided educational material.
You sent her to a conference.

And when she asked for space —
You called her children “at risk.”


Labels: Section 47 coercion, Westminster jurisdiction ignored, social worker procedural abuse, disability accommodation refusal, Samira Issa misconduct, sewer gas retaliation, safeguarding theatre, Brompton records ignored, conference as punishment, written communication breach

Documented Obsessions