⟡ “They Told Me to Stop Emailing — But That’s the Only Way I Can Breathe” ⟡
*A Formal Record of Institutional Retaliation Against Written Disability Communication
Filed: 24 November 2024
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/EMAIL-12
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-24_SWANK_Email_Westminster_WrittenOnlyRejection_DisabilityTraumaDisclosure.pdf
Email documenting mental health and police rejection of written contact from a disabled mother, highlighting cumulative trauma, care burdens, and verbal communication limitations.
I. What Happened
In this quietly devastating message, Polly Chromatic stated that she is finding it difficult to read written communication from anyone — not because of her capacity, but because of what always follows:
“I’m met with rejection so often and it’s traumatising and heartbreaking for me.”
She refers to repeated institutional responses — from mental health centers, psychologists, and the police — instructing her to stop emailing when she was simply trying to communicate without compromising her ability to speak or breathe.
The email includes:
A clear verbal disability notice
A reference to her responsibilities caring for four children and homeschooling
A structural truth: writing was never about convenience — it was survival
“I have to be as efficient as possible.”
II. What the Complaint Establishes
That written communication was met with systemic rejection
That verbal disability was ignored even in safeguarding and medical contexts
That care responsibilities compound the impossibility of repetition
That emotionally neutral outreach was reclassified as excessive
That this document functions as both a plea and a record of harm
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because what professionals call “excessive emailing” is often just the only way someone disabled can document their own mistreatment.
This message is what happens when trauma is not just experienced, but structurally maintained — when every attempt to communicate safely becomes a trigger for dismissal.
SWANK logs it because no one should be punished for needing efficiency when the system creates delay.
IV. SWANK’s Position
This was not overcontact.
It was effort, framed as inconvenience.
We do not accept that written contact should be weaponised as harassment when it is medically necessary.
We do not accept that polite, trauma-informed outreach should be pathologised.
We will document every rejection letter sent to someone who had no other way to speak.
⟡ 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.