jump to navigation

– Learning “Joan Wheeler Speak” May 25, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Having Fun with Disfunctionality, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world.
Tags:
comments closed

Sisters Ruth and Gert had an email exchange today. Gert related a “critter story.”

1. Gert:    Here’s a little critter story: we were in the garden when I felt something hit my pant leg and saw a very large frog had leaped over my leg and landed in the weeds near me. There is a creek in back of the garden, that’s why we get the frogs. So wanting to play with it I pulled off a tall grass and tried touching him to get him to move. He stayed put, the grass was too flimsy so I grabbed a piece of tall thicker clive with a flower head on it. The frog started to ‘fight’ the clive that was touching him. He snapped his mouth, reached with one of his front legs at it, not once but several times. D.  said he never saw a frog do that. The frog kept fighting so I turned the piece around and lightly jabbed him with the flower head, it was small, but the frog snapped around it and started to chew! It was amazing! I pulled it out of his mouth and it was obvious that he didn’t like the taste. Finally D, push something at him and pointed him into the direction of the pond. I just love watching critters.

2. Ruth, who loves critters and hates to see them “jabbed” found a nice picture of Kermit the frog to emphasize that point and sent it off to Gert with the following caption:

YO! mcqueen, ya’ll betta stop jabbin’ my homies

3. Gert sends me these 2 insulting emails, blaming ME for her behavior at the library. Like it’s MY fault that she cackles like the Wicked Witch of the West! (sigh, she blames me for everything).  

    1. How many times do I have to tell you I am at the library and they will kick me out for laughing too loud!!!!

    2. Oh… see Ruth what you made me Do!!! I sent it off before I was FINISHED, you are picking on me. I’m gona tell on you…don’t know to whom but I’m gona tell…. That’s my Joan impersonation

4. Ruth sends off this email:    sigh, do I have to teach you EVERYTHING? If you want to do a Joan impersonation, you have to do this:

Ruth, I would appreciate it if you would NOT make fun of my interaction with a frog. The frog had leaped over my leg and violated MY civil rights in sitting in peace on the grass. I jabbed the frog because that was my right.

Now I have told you before that I am in the public library where silence is maintained. If you must send me emails, I demand that they NOT contain material that may make my laugh. If I get kicked out of the library, it will be YOUR fault.

When I get through this letter, I will be contacting my anti-frog friends and tell them that you are harassing me and interfering with my life. This will not be tolerated. Don’t pick on me because of who I am.

Gert

5. Gert then fires off the following email, in Joan Wheeler-speak:     You don’t know everything! Just because I’m the oldest doesn’t mean you have the right to pick on me. don’t you know that I’m the authority figure besides I didn’t have the time, I couldn’t think, and no one listens to me and I didn’t what the library staff to get mad at me because then I’d go back into my inner life and get so depressed and I’m so confused as it is that didn’t know how to impersonate just right and you know how hard things are for me and the frog was the only friend I had that day and so I could do what ever I wanted to do to him and besides….

My friend, yes I have A friend!, my friend said and I quote ‘Loved the frog story.’ And I didn’t get that quote illegally, its the true, I don’t lie! so stop harassing me about my frog. Oh and I’m not going to tell the whole story to my friend, yes the one friend I have, I’m not going to tell her how you didn’t like my frog story and that you said mean horrible things to me and sent me a nasty picture of Kermit too!

***** ******* ********* ******* ********

do you see what reading the book Forbidden Family has done to us? We can now speak Joan Wheeler Speak! And do you see how a little story of a frog getting jabbed with a piece of grass can get turned around into a huge ridiculous whine if Joan got hold of it.

Advertisements

Onwards, while ignoring bratty Joan Mary Wheeler’s whines. May 21, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

We Three Sippel Sisters, having yesterday responded AGAIN to charges of harrassment, gossiping about, lying about, stalking, cyber-stalking, bullying, cyber-bullying and interference with/to Joan Mary Wheeler, have decided that from now on, we will simply ignore the little brat and her temper tantrums and her whines.

I think we have said about 5 times already that Joan does not want anyone, including her 3 birth sisters, to do ANY of the things I listed above, but she will do ALL of the above to us, and others.

We will NOT however, be intimidated from gathering any research about Joan’s continued harassment,  gossiping about, lying about, stalking, cyber-stalking, bullying, cyber-bullying and interference with/to US and OUR FAMILY. Joan is not the Queen of the internet. Nor is she our mother. She is nothing but a hypocritical, lying, 54-year-old brat, who continuously goes whining to her adoption buddies or throws temper tantrums when she doesn’t get her way, or sees that the world just is not going to revolve in the way that she wants it to.

I was watching The Young and the Restless today. One of the characters said an interesting thing to another character. I want to say this to Joan:

THE ONLY ONE TORMENTING YOU IS ….. YOU!

Think about it Joan.  You are all alone in the world. You have pushed EVERYONE away from you. Your birth family, your adoptive family, your friend Bonnie, who gave me your computer, many others. Do you not see a pattern? YOU, and YOU alone are doing it all to YOURSELF. And you can’t face that. So you lie about everyone (including yourself) to shift the blame onto everyone else. You lost ME, because you stole from me. But you wanted to blame ME for your loss of me, your birth sister, so you concocted little schemes like sending forged father’s day cards and notes supposedly from your son to my fiance, but addressing the envelopes to me. Just so I would respond and then you could parade my response around as an incident of “harrassment.”  click here to read about a letter that came to my house in June 1993. The envelope was addressed to me. It was in Joan’s handwriting. with her return address, but inside, there was a letter supposedly from her 10 year old son written to my husband. We had also recieved a Father’s Day Card under the same circumstances.  This post contains the actual letter that her “son” wrote, along with a sample of Joan’s own handwriting. There are a lot of similarities. The following letters are all the same: a, e, r, t, with the same way that Joan has of mixing printed and cursive. Something a 10 year old wouldn’t do. Also, the letter is addressed Dear John, but if Dennis had written it, it would have been addressed as UNCLE John. And like I said, why would Joan mark the envelope to ME? With her return  address? Shouldn’t the envelope been addressed to John, with the return address as Dennis. I no longer have the envelope, but I think the letter speaks for itself. What kind of woman uses her own child to engineer a response from someone, then use that response and say it is “harassment.” no, the real harassment has always been FROM JOAN.

THOSE DAYS ARE OVER! People are now seeing through your manipulations, your game-playing, your schemes and your lies. You don’t know it yet, but we have a surprise for you.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.  And Joan, my dear, your days of fooling people are OVER!

1. chayeletMay 21, 2010 [Edit]

Hear,hear! ‘Bye JW.

Reply
2. Gert – May 22, 2010 [Edit]

Ruth speaks the truth!
In the past you have attempted, and in many ways succeeded, in keeping us sisters from speaking out, but that has changed. You and only you published a book of lies and fabrications and now we have our opportunity to speak our truth and there are many many many surprises awaiting you. So I suggest you stop whining because no one is listening to you. We are all too busy telling the truth and undoing the harm that you did.

Cyber Stalking or merely reading a blog on the World Wide Web -Dictator Joan issues another selfish decree! May 20, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

roflmao! So we are accused of cyber stalking again. um, correct me if I’m wrong – but if a thing is put out on the internet, then it is meant to be READ? And just how would Joan Wheeler know what is on our blog, and that we are “cyber-stalking”? By reading something here on our blog? Well, as you see, DICTATOR  Joan Wheeler wants to come here to read our blog, but she declares that we CANNOT read hers. geez!

Joan, my dear, you do not own the internet. And if you are putting MY name on YOUR adoption discussion forum, than I claim the right to see what is being said about ME! YOU do not own MY name, I do. If you talk about me on the net, I want to know about it.

Oh, but whiny little Joan Wheeler, all over her book bitches and moans when she finds out (or even imagines) when people are talking about HER. But she thinks she can talk about ME and doesn’t see that is a double standard.

Grow up Joan. “oh, they’re talking about me again.” Well, you talked about me on May 8, 2010 and directed your buddies here. It’s ok for YOU to cyber stalk ME and put MY name out on discussion forums, but we can’t do the same? And FYI: We are NOT doing the same.  We are not going on a bunch of websites talking about you. We could care less about you. And this blog is NOT about YOU: it is about ME and MY SISTERS, refuting YOUR lies. And we are not talking about YOUR life, we are talking about OUR lives. Your life gets mentioned when it has affected ours. And by they way, YOU talked about OUR lives in your book! So what’s your beef? What an idiot! Joan can talk about MY life, but I can’t talk about hers. Joan can go on the internet and talk about ME, but she doesn’t want ME to go on the internet and talk about HER. Talk about being a bully! Joan Wheeler – consummate cyber bully. Like she has been all her life. She has no self-esteem, so to get her way, she resorts to bullying. Do as I say, not as I do, is her command! Joan, YOU DO NOT COMMAND ME! I do as I see you do. uh, I mean, isn’t that what you want? Us to think like you? No? Well what the hell DO you want? pshaw, I don’t care what you want. You sure don’t care what I want, and never did. I was just a piece of dirt to you. A piece of dirt you thought you could steal from and get away with it. well, in a sense you did, because you never repaid the money you stole, but you know, what goes around, comes around. You’ll pay for all the crap you did to me and my sisters. And I think it’s coming round.  If isn’t evident at the moment, it will shortly. I don’t know when, but things are going to blow up in your face.  lol.

oh, and thanks for the publicity to my blog. oh! sending more people over here to read all about the crap you did to us and the lies you’ve told about me and my family! roflmao! stupid is as stupid does. thank ye, thank ye, thank ye! lol — well peeps, you are all quite welcome to come here and read anything you want! That’s why it’s here! I WANT people to read it. Why else would I be typing this stuff up and publishing it? Just to practice my typing skills? lol.

by the way, Joan, nice job obtaining John’s birth certificate. thanks a bunch. lol. Miss Know-it-all, knows all about birth certificates. Promised John to help him get his, but couldn’t.  Why not? I thought she was the EXPERT in such things. tsk tsk. No worries, we went and got it ourselves, with absolutely no problem.

everybody, on three, sob for poor little Joanie. She can dish it out, but can't take it. boo hoo. cry for the little Joanie. sob

Comments»

1. Gert – May 20, 2010 [Edit]

Joan has said ‘They read my website now, just have they have done to my other blogs. If they don’t want me in their lives, they have no business reading my website. They are obsessed with me and are determined to bring me down. I will not let that happen.’

This is Gert talking and I have NOT been on Joan’s site. It is no us that is obsessed, how would Joan know what we are saying if she is not reading our blog?

The above statement by Joan and other things are out there on the internet! Free for all to see, can’t be controlled! Listen carefully, Joan, no one is stalking or bullying you, it is all in your ‘inner life’. The purpose of this blog is so that us three sisters can have our own voices heard, without being charged, by you, of harassing, stalking or bullying you. Those days are over!

You wrote a book great! It is NOW the subject of a great deal of reading, pondering and writing reports about its contents. That is what happens when you ‘go public’, you are subjected to praise and criticisms, it is not harassing, stalking or bullying. Face the facts that it is you and only you that is afraid of what we are saying about the contents of the book.

An evil deed, like freshly drawn milk, does not turn sour at once….
Dhammapad

Joan your evil deeds over the years of slaundering us, telling lies, fabricating nonsense with malicious intent about us, browbeating, harassing, and varioius deeds of omission (so you don’t look bad) are coming to fruition. You were the one who wrote a book, now deal with the fall out from it!

I will say what has to be said and no one Joan will stop me. I have only just began and I will not stop until I have addressed every single page of your book of lies and fabrications that deal with the lives of myself, my children, my sisters, my parents and everyone else that you mention in this book of filth.

2. RuthMay 20, 2010 [Edit]

I agree with Gert.
Go back and read the title and subtitle of this blog:
Refuting a Book of Lies: Forbidden Family
what Joan Wheeler doesn’t want us to do: expose her lies and tell the truth about us and our family

everything has a link in a chain of events:
1. Joan wrote a book. that book was full of falsehoods and slams against her own blood kin.
2. Joan goes on the internet and slams her own blood sisters – as far back as September 2008
3. A blog is put up to TELL THE TRUTH behind the falsehoods in the book and what Joan says on the internet

Cause and effect, my dear, cause and effect.
and as with most bullies, Joan can dish it out, but can’t take it. too bad, my dear. as Gert just wrote: “You were the one who wrote a book, now deal with the fall out from it.”

Accusations of Cyber- bullying May 20, 2010

Posted by chayelet in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
comments closed

It has come to my attention that JW has re-posted, and updated, a post she did some time ago accusing her birth sisters of cyber-stalking her.As if she was worth our time and energy. To be honest, I couldn’t care less what she or her friends think-we sisters are here answering her book, and ONLY answering her book. I comment only rarely.

I have no intention of allowing JW off the hook over the lies in her book, neither  have I any intention of taking her bait- MY life has been regurgitated once too often, I am sick of hearing about JW’s adoption and her complaints of same-if she wants to think I am harassing her, let her- I couldn’t care less. As for multiple orders of protection against me- that’s news to me- SHOW ME THE PROOF! I live in a different country, where USA legislation has no jurisdiction-if JW and her friends want to delude themselves that the Good Ol’ USA has power over the UK – let them. No US cop, judge, or court has any jurisdiction over me.

If declaring, as I do in Chayelet’s blog, that I consider JW to be Persona Non Grata, and that I no longer want to be associated with her, is Cyber-stalking her, then I’m guilty as charged. However, I can only say that by re-posting this silly nonsense, JW has shown herself to be the Cyber-bully.

QUITE FRANKLY,WHO THE HELL CARES ANYMORE- I BLOODY DON’T!

LIAR JOAN WHEELER AT IT AGAIN! No one said Joan obtained my mother’s hospital records illegally! May 17, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , ,
comments closed

https://ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/

Is the post where I address Joan’s having my mother’s medical records. Nowhere does it say that Joan obtained them illegally. Again, we see Joan FALSELY ACCUSING ME OF SOMETHING! NO ONE HAS ACCUSED JOAN OF ILLEGALLY OBTAINING THE RECORDS. 

Also, both Gert and I, when we discussed this matter, we SAID it was pre-HPPA (federal patient privacy act of 2003). So why does Joan feel the need to repeat this. Why is she covering her ass if she did nothing wrong. And why does she say she got written permission from my father in December 1977?

I TALKED TO MY FATHER IN 1982, OR 1983, AND HE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT! I immediately called Millard Fillmore Hospital at that time, and they would not, or could not tell me how Joan obtained the records. I then requested that in order for anyone to further obtain my mother’s records that TWO signatures be required: mine and my fathers. I called my father back and told him what I’d done, and he said “Good.”

Joan posts scans of a note from Millard Fillmore’s Medical Record Department on her blog, on May 15, 2010. This note states that it needed permission to release the records. On the bottom of the note is Joan’s handwriting stating that she had a handwritten note from my father, authorizing the release of my mother ‘s medical records. She writes that this note, was hand delivered to her doctor. There is no way of knowing when she wrote that little note, as she does not date  it.

I want to see that note! If Joan had photocopies of the note from the hospital, surely she has a photocopy of my father’s note. oh – she probably conveniently “lost it.” Or maybe it got burned up when she burned her papers in her living room. Question: if she burned up all her papers, how does these notes from her doctor and the hospital show up on her blog?

And again, Joan states that my mother’s death was brought about by the pregnancy and birth of her.

WRONG!  WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

MY MOTHER WAS PREGNANT ALREADY, THEY DID NOT DISCOVER THE CANCER UNTIL JANUARY 19, WHEN SHE HAD EXPLORATORY SURGERY. JOAN WAS BORN ON JANUARY 7, AND MY MOTHER DIED ON MARCH 28.

ENOUGH JOAN! YOU DID NOT CAUSE MY MOTHER’S DEATH. NOBODY EVER SAID YOU DID!

BUT NO, JOAN WANTS IT TO BE THAT WAY, SO PEOPLE CAN FEEL SORRY FOR HER. She feels some sick compulsion that 1. she is responsible for my mother’s death, 2. my mother died of kidney cancer.

THIS IS BECAUSE JOAN SUFFERS FROM RECURRING KIDNEY INFECTIONS. THIS IS NOT KIDNEY CANCER JOAN. AND MY MOTHER DID NOT DIE FROM KIDNEY CANCER.

She had OVARIAN cancer. And in a few short weeks the dam cancer spread to other parts of the body. When they opened her up on January 19, they saw there was nothing to be done, and in a few more weeks she was DEAD.

NOW FOR THE LOVE OF GOD JOAN LET IT REST! LEAVE MY MOTHER ALONE!!!!!!SHUT THE HELL UP ABOUT MY MOTHER!

1. chayeletMay 17, 2010 [Edit]

I have wondered for a long time about this-I think it is part of the Adopted Child Syndrome. It seems to me that it is JW herself who blames JW for the death of our mother-and by thus doing, transfers that way of thinking onto everyone else. She needs to be blamed, otherwise, how could she justify her own existence, let alone the sorry state of the life she has made for herself? At least, that is what the Theory of Adoption Psychology says, but,how much of this is down to nature, and how much of this is manipulation of the Crutch of Adoption Psychology?

If memory serves me right, I believe that JW relates in her book THREE separate occasions in which our father sits her down to re-assure her that she did not kill our mother-this is evidence that the woman is obsessed with this issue, and cannot, or will not, give herself permission to just LET IT GO.

When I was about 16 years old, a Catholic nun told me I was responsible,not only for my mother’s death, but for my step-mother’s death to boot.Young as I was, I knew that was codswallop, and I promptly left the Church.

But, there IS something hiding in the bushes here-if no-one has accused JW of obtaining hospital records illegally, why is she even raising the subject? Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Reply
RuthMay 18, 2010 [Edit]

You hit the the motherlode there!
to quote you: “But, there IS something hiding in the bushes here-if no-one has accused JW of obtaining hospital records illegally, why is she even raising the subject? Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”
All I did was raise the subject on HOW she got the records, I never said that she got them illegally. All I know is that I phoned my father to ask how if he knew that Joan had the records. He said that he did not. I then called the hospital and requested that 2 signatures be required, mine, and my fathers’s, for any more issuance of mom’s records. Then I called him back and told him what I’d done, and he said “Good.”
I am still wondering HOW she got the records. If she obtained them legally, fine. That’s all I asked: HOW did she get them. I never said she got them illegally.
And as to your interpretation as to why Joan keeps INSISTING that it was the pregnancy and her birth, her very existance, that killed our mother, again, I think you hit the motherlode.
Joan, get it through your head: pregnancy does NOT cause cancer. Pregnancy does NOT cause kidney failure, kidney cancer, kidney infections. A child’s birth does NOT cause cancer. A child’s birth does NOT cause kidney failure, kidney cancer, kidney infections.
Ergo, YOU or your neo-natal state DID NOT CAUSE OUR MOTHER’S DEATH!

And stop saying that The Three Sippel Sisters blame you for mom’s death, and we NEVER said this to anyone, let alone YOU as you report in your book of f’ing lies. If we did blame you, we wouldn’t have gone to the all the trouble to find you and WANT to be reunited with you.

As I advised you in my reply to Karen’s rant: LAY OFF THE ALCOHOL! IT IS CLOUDING YOUR JUDGEMENT!

Gert – May 18, 2010 [Edit]

The burden of proof is all on Joan, she asserts something she must prove it, period, where is the ‘hand written’ note from my father? Someone has been talking to her, why else is she all of a sudden defending herself, again. On pg 134 she glossed over the fact that ‘dad gave his permission’, such an important item would demand to have had documentation from the start, she knew she didn’t have it and wanted to bury it in her storytelling. In my post called ‘personal psycho drama’, which hasn’t been posted yet, I bring up the issue of her getting the medical records, check that post out when it appears.

Major question to Joan, who hand delivered dad’s note? Joan? Dad? the invisible little people? again she thinks everyone is stupid and would not question her authority. On pg 64 she talks about the nursery card, how did she get that? in the book her doctor is Dr Sands

She claims that mom’s medical records where given to her gyn doctor, is that the same as on the letter head of her ‘proof’? and finally, she claims she burned things, apparently she didn’t, she has certain things, but not the hand-written note from Dad!

Reply
RuthMay 18, 2010 [Edit]

right on sis! right on! — (my “inner city” talk, that Joan constantly slams in her book. as if living in the inner city automatically makes you a rotten person. how judgemental!)

repost: Forbidden family or forbidden child? by Gert McQueen- April 1, 2010 May 17, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

Title: Forbidden family or forbidden child? – April 1, 2010
I can’t “bump this up” so I’m reposting this. It got buried after last weeks’ mud-slinging.  So now that we got some stuff out of our system, let’s get back to refuting Joan’s book.

UPDATE…NOVEMBER 2015 as older posts are viewed this announcement is being placed. Joan ‘revised’ yet again her ‘story’, it is NOW called ‘duped by adoption’. To learn more see Gert’s second blog and a Facebook page.

https://gertmcqueen2.wordpress.com

https://www.facebook.com/dupedbyadoption1

NOW to continue here…

‘The evil life is really the thoughtless life’….The Dhammapada

‘The superior man seeks what is right; the inferior one, what is profitable.’ ….Confucius

Forbidden family or forbidden child? Why would anyone who adopts a child what to possess that child? Joan’s adoptive parents failed her because of their possessiveness and fear of losing her. Why would anyone (Joan) think that they could change adoption laws by showing the world all their inner torment and faulty reasoning? It actually will do the reverse; this book will never be taken seriously by anyone that can alter laws. If any laws ought to be changed it would be a more stringent review of the prospective parents. Having adopted my son I know that there are extensive background checks but nothing can really uncover the mental processes of people…until it is too late.

As I showed in my last post, Joan had shown very early on that she has some serious mental issues in her life. Why did she not get help? Because her adopted parents didn’t get it for her because they did not see the signs because they had serious mental issues themselves. What I find fascinating is that Joan has no sense of personal shame; she just lays it all out, bearing all, for the world to see, her inner tormented self. This book is not about adoption or adoption reform and social activism, it’s a vanity piece for Joan’s inner world to take center stage in all its ugliness because she was forbidden to be from very early in her life! But if she thinks that this book will help the ‘cause’ of changing adoption rules, she is sadly mistaken. Showing the world how adoption affected your (Joan’s) inner life will not change the laws.

Pg 90 early signs of anxiety, panic, agitation, worry, and inability to tell people how she feels. When she does describe her feelings or about hings she would like to spend time on, she has a strange use of words, such as on pg 91 ‘I salvaged some time each week…’ Salvaged? Why not put aside some time, or took some time, or looked forward to some time? Salvaged!

Even when she is describing events that should be joyful and calm or when she learns about her adoption, she always describes then in terms of inner torment. Pg 92, ‘…felt an agonizing sense of recognition, instantly repulsed at the level of betrayal…’ She sees herself as the ‘victim’; everything is seen from that victim’s eyes.

Pg 93 ‘…filled with resentment…I was ostracized…when I alone I huddled…crying…felt lonely even when with people…started smoking pot…didn’t like to but did it anyway…was out of control and depressed.’ Where is her self-esteem? If she didn’t have it at age 18 before she met the birth family, where do you think she lost it? Where were her adoptive parents while she was smoking pot in her room?

Pg 95 is an ex. of how Joan invents stories to fit in with her view of herself and those around her; for this vanity piece. It is 1974 just before she goes to college, she tells that I, her eldest birth sister, my children and my boy friend, went to the cemetery to visit our mother’s grave. She states that ‘the adults took a few puffs on a joint to get stoned. I shouldn’t have done it and felt uncomfortable, but Irma (that’s me) brought it out, she insisted…it would ease the pain and I went along with her lead. She was the eldest in the family and I looked up to her.’

All totally wrong, never happened. Number 1, my boyfriend never went with us to the cemetery. Number 2, I never smoked pot nor had a drink with my children around; my children never knew anything about such things until in their teens, in 1974 they were 8 and 9. My children’s natural father, at that time my ex-husband, had intimidated me for years that he would take the children from me. I virtually lived ‘in fear’ that he would do such a thing and therefore lived a very ‘low-profile’ life-style, something that Joan has no concept of. Number 3, she had already admitted that ‘she smoked pot’ on pg 93 so why is she trying to blame me that she smoked?

Not only has she fabricated a story; she makes it look like I made her do it, for what possible reason? Joan again proves, by her own words of lies, that she has no boundaries and no consideration for other people. How dare she put into print that I smoked pot! Has she no sense of the consequences of her words and deeds to other people? If she is capable of lying about her own family members just what is she capable of with her ‘adoptive friends’? Would you trust her?

Then there’s more melodrama! Actually the pages 96-101, where she details the family histories are quite fascinating, that is what adoption reunions are supposes to be about, family histories, not all of Joan’s melodramas. But it becomes quite apparent that it is within the Wheeler family where the troubles originated. The main source of trouble and later harassment is shown on pg 99, it is the adoptive father’s brother, John Wheeler, if that is his correct name. It is things that he does later, to Joan, which my sisters and I get the blame for. It is also quite interesting to note the family dynamics at work within the Wheeler family. The antagonism is palpable, the intimidations, the betrayals; all learned and practiced within the Wheeler family complex long before Joan knew she was part of our family! Joan is the product of her upbringing; she has no real claim on the Herr/Sippel families.

On pg 99 she has a ‘confrontation’ with an adoptive uncle and she fully describes how she took from his pocket a document claiming that it was hers…and she wonders why he took ‘revenge’ later! On pg 101 she again shows her amoral character, she sneaks around waiting for the ‘appropriate’ time to take ‘it was mine now and stealing didn’t bother me.’ She speaks with contempt for her adoptive parents, ‘rage burned inside me…why did they do this to me…deceive me…felt cheated out of life…deliberately kept away from…’ She says, ‘an unseen force had been destroying my self-confidence and self-respect…making me feel worthless, unwanted and unloved.’ And this is how one talks about people who raised her for 18 years! It’s me, me, me, with no respect for the people who fed her, changed her diapers and for 18 years provided for her. Shame, shame, shame!

In chapter 12 as she begins college she ‘self-defines’ herself, she ‘wasn’t normal…filled with anxiety’. Even in written communications with adoptive parents she can not let go of her hatred for them; she feels the mother ‘played God’. Remember this people because it is a learned behavior and Joan has ‘played God’ many times to many people, I know what I speak. Even when a relative dies and she has to go home for a funeral she is selfish; ‘grandma couldn’t have picked a worse time to die’!

It is in college where she begins to learn about adoption laws with research in a Family  Dynamics course. This is also where she is introduced to and indoctrination into militarist activism along with radical feminism and Political Correctness, or PCism, all of which are the banes of modern society. It is my opinion, clearly labeled here, that the beginning of the breakdown of civil society was spawned by radical feminism and PCism and it has brought us to the sorry state of our present social discourse where rudeness and crudeness seems to be all that we know how to act whether it be in person or on the Net!

Like it or not everyone’s family is what it is, that is the nature of ‘being’ in the human race. It does no good to be judgmental about what your family is or isn’t nor does it do any good to try to get members of your family to ‘fit’ the picture that you think they should be. Joan has a view of what life and everyone’s part in it should be and well, it’s all about her. She can’t accept that people have different views from her and she is quick to condemn another for their ‘mistakes’. Case in point, pg 107, where after she receives a letter from President Ford, she is  ‘…bothered by the president’s misperceptions…his use of the word ‘real’ to describe his natural father and his use of the phrase ‘the only father I ever had’.  Oh, she is more aware of the use of proper words than the President of the USA! But then she admits that ‘…since I was new at this …I shouldn’t expect him ….to be aware of the fledgling adoption reform movement…’ How magnanimous of her! And ‘if I only had tried (with the President) I wonder what would have happened.’ Boy does she have visions of her own self-importance; she was just way ahead of her time!

Let’s go back a bit here with what is meant by ‘the only father I ever had’; substitute any form of parent, mother, stepparent, foster-parent etc. Just what is the problem with that statement or sentiment? I had foster-parents from the ages of 10 to 18 and they were wonderful and gave me many insights into how parents behave. I’m not saying everything was great, but over the years, I have come to have great respect for the job they did, not only for myself and my siblings but also for the many other foster children they cared for. I am put off by Joan’s insistence that those that are ‘other’ than birth parents have no real standing in the parenting department.

Pg 108 is another example of flat out lies. Joan states ‘…eldest sister (that’s me), her boyfriend and children came to….college to drive me home…family reunion…in Jamestown.’ Again, truth is, I did not go to get her and take her anywhere, neither did my boyfriend nor my children and don’t recall any reunion in Jamestown or any other place that I attended! On pg 110 she clearly states that ‘on the drive home with B, cousin G and Aunt C…’ If I took her to this reunion why did I not take her back home, why did she go back with others? No, I didn’t go somewhere else because I never was there in the first place! In March of 2010, I spoke with my children; they said they were not at this so-called event. My boyfriend, at that time, is dead; he was sick most of 1974/5, did not go many places with me and died in 76. All these  details about what happened at a reunion, that I never went to, is presented only to show that Joan was finally getting attention, she ‘felt like a celebrity’, never mind that she lies to make up the story.

Again why does she have to retell intimate family sentiments, be they good, bad or ugly? It is no one’s business outside of the family. Details and individual feelings and opinions about other family members stay within the family, but Joan doesn’t take other people into consideration, she hears a tale she must repeat it. In all her attempts at getting information from families, both adoptive and birth, she exhibits all kinds of inappropriate responses. She thinks that adults have to tell their children everything and if they don’t she is betrayed.  She is too thin-skinned, can’t handle people who act abruptly, jumps to quick conclusions without thinking and resents having to spend so much time getting to know birth family and getting answers from adoptive family. Gee, I thought she wanted the truth, so why is she resentful? It’s like she wants her cake and be able to eat it too. She is so inconvenienced by it all! Forget about truth, it is her own perceptions that are important. When she doesn’t get her way she is ‘confused and angry…lashed out at those closest to me…screamed with rage…my out of control behavior…’ It’s all about Joan and she is all about drama! Hey she has to sell the book, you know!

When Joan is dealing with others, non-family members, she is the nicest, sweetest, loveliest person promoting of all things, truth! see pg 113. But she doesn’t understand family members’ non-interest in the adoption issues; she has to point out that I ‘complained that adoption wasn’t her (my) thing’. Is there a point here?

On pg 114 Joan finally finds the Adoptees Liberty Movement Association and ‘a militant with more than her fair share of enemies’, sounds like Joan met her hero! Pg 115, ‘…the confusion and rage within me began to consume me and change me into a radical adoptee….that militant part of me grew in ways that were unhealthy … I turned against all adoptive parents, feeling they were totally wrong and were to blame for causing devastating problems for their adoptees…’ And this was her justification to make me be wrong when I adopted my own son in 1981!

Too bad for me and my family isn’t it that she didn’t ‘…recover from this negative stage  until….walked into my life in 1981…where my militant aggression has been re-directed away from adoptive parents toward lawmakers and policy makers.’ The damage Joan began in 1980-81 to my family was only the beginning. As she ends this chapter, both in the book and in her life, of 1974, as the ‘Honeymoon Stage of Reunion’, the Honeymoon is over stage has only just began. Stay tuned!

!

Selfish Whiny Joan Wheeler strikes again, and gets another person mad at her May 13, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

On a post elsewhere on the net, Joan writes the following about her adoptive mother, who is in a nursing home. She says, “She’s very old and I’m trying to celebrate what life she has left. It is awfully difficult to sit there and hear her say that she is glad she could see her sister on Easter. Someone else got her into a wheelchair for that visit. I just am so hurt and angry that Mom wanted to see HER sister on that special day, but me, I spent Easter and months before and months after trying to get attorney to help me sue my blood sisters for harassing me. Yes, they are still are at it. I am disgusted and at wit’s end.”….”You can look up Ruth Sippel Pace at wordpress. I am so disgusted at the filth they say about me.”….”My sisters are reading the book I wrote and because they do not like my life, they make all kinds of hateful remarks on their blogs condemning me.” ….”I have no relationship with them for decades and all they can do is piss on me through their hateful online shit.”

Okay, first, we are NOT harassing her. This blog is just us seeing a passage in her book that is a LIE about OUR lives and correcting that LIE. We are not in contact with her in anyway.

 Second. Listen to what she writes: ” I spent Easter and months before and months after trying to get attorney to help me sue my blood sisters” Joan wrote this post on May 8, 2010. Easter was observed on April 4, 2010. ONE MONTH AND FOUR DAYS PRIOR TO JOAN WRITING THIS. This is hardly “monthS” But this is what Joan does: she exagerates everything. She gets one phone call, she tells everybody it was 20 phone calls. She gets one letter, she tells everyone it was 20 letters. Months before and months after. Months after my ass. – oh and by the way, correct me if I’m wrong – isn’t Easter celebrated on a SUNDAY? Lawyers don’t do business on a Sunday. — see how she exagerates and wants people to feel o-so-sorry for her that her Easter got mucked up by us. Baloney! What was she doing? On the internet looking for a lawyer?

Joan – YOU made the choice YOURSELF to spend Easter trying yet again to piss on us.  I do a lot of writing on this here blog, and I got lot more writing to do, but on May 1, I made the conscious decision to go somewhere and celebrate Beltane. Choices, life is made of choices, and only YOU make yourself chose what to do on any given day, Easter, Beltane, or whatever. So stop blaming me for YOUR misery. I was no where NEAR you on Easter.

Joan is highly upset that my blog is in operation. She says: “My sisters are reading the book I wrote and because they do not like my life, they make all kinds of hateful remarks on their blogs condemning me.” No, this blog is not because we do not like HER life, we do not like what she has said in her book about OUR LIVES.

She then says: they make all kinds of hateful remarks on their blogs condemning me.” Wow, for once she has spoken truth. You dam right we are condemning her. We condemn her for the lies she has told about US. The lies she has told about OUR FAMILY. The lies she has told about HERSELF in not admitting to HER harassment of US.

“I have no relationship with them for decades…” Another exageration. It was in 1990 that I had had it up to my eyeballs with her lying, her stealing from me that I ended my sisterly relationship with her. TWO decades. But I did try to reconnect with her in 1992, 2003 and 2004. Each time it ended with Joan lying to me, and starting shit. In October 2003, I started a family website and invited Joan to join it. In January 2004, out of the clear blue sky, she sends me an email, accusing me of all sorts of crap, and even dragged my best friend into it. My friend, who had nothing whatever to do with the website, or anything. That was 6 years ago. hardly “decades.” click HERE to see the actual print outs of the email exchange that we had, and how she reported it in her book. In the book, she completely changes it, and all I have done is put it on my blog to show people that she is a liar, and cannot be trusted.

This is what she is mad about: that we are daring to show everyone what a creep she is. And she is pissed that her rotten character is coming out for everyone to see and she knows that people are seeing the true Joan Wheeler. If she doesn’t like  our “hateful online shit,” well she has only HERSELF to blame, for lying about us in her book.

And she continues to lie. TO THIS DAY, SHE LIES. She just said it: “They do not like my life.” This blog is NOT about Joan”s life, this is about OUR lives. But see, Joan the QUEEN, wants everything to be about HER!

My god, read what she wrote about her mother’s visit to her sister on Easter: “It is awfully difficult to sit there and hear her say that she as glad she could see her sister on Easter. Someone else got her into a wheelchair for that visit. I just am so hurt and angry that Mom wanted to see HER sister on that special day…”

What a little brat! So her mom wanted to see her own sister, and Joan throws a hissy fit? Then continues her whine: “but me, …” Do you see what a spoiled little brat she is? Oh come on now Joan. This is behavior a 5th grader uses. NOT the behavior of a 54 year old woman, who would see that her mother was HAPPY to see her sister on a holiday.

Do you people see how Joan turns everything around into a whine about HER life? And as for us pissing on her in this blog: Joan, again, YOU BROUGHT THIS ON YOURSELF. YOU PISSED ON US IN YOUR BOOK, NOW WE GET TO PISS ON YOU. Don’t like it? too bad. Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it? piss piss.

And now, here’s a rant from someone OTHER than Joan’s sisters: oh yes, readers, there are other people out there who Joan PISSED on in her book. And they are starting to speak out. This is from someone who had a unpleasant time of her life put out in Joan’s book WITHOUT HER PERMISSION, violating her privacy. (hear that any lawyer out there: Joan put stuff out in her book without people’s permission!)

May 12 – Karen’s rant

I am PISSED off that YOU JOAN, ARE trying to portray not only my mother in bad light but MY entire family!!! YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS putting all that in YOUR book..IT has nothing to do with adoption. All YOU want JOAN Is people to feel sorry for you. YOU lived with an ABUSIVE MOTHER AND CHILDHOOD! YOU MARRIED ABUSIVE MEN! YOU NEVER ONCE TOOK IT UPON YOURSELF TO BETTER YOUR LIFE….YOU NEVER REALLY WORKED IN YOUR LIFE! YOU LIVED ON MY AND OTHER TAXPAYERS KINDNESS..ON WELFARE, LOW PAYING JOBS SO F’NG WHAT, GET A SECOND JOB AND FOR SUCH A FEMINIST YOU DEPENDED ON YOUR HUSBAND TO MUCH! I RAISED TWO CHILDREN BY MYSELF AND WORKED FROM THE TIME MY SON WAS 4 MONTHS OLD AND I WAS /AM YOUNGER THAN YOU!!!!.

I am unsure what the letters mean after your name…but they sure as hell can’t stand for any type of real degree…YOU DON’T HAVE ONE! YOU CONTINUE TO LIVE IN A SICK WORLD..GET THE MENTAL HELP YOU DESPERATELY NEED…YOUR PAST SESSIONS OBVIOUSLY DIDN’T WORK.!! YOUR Mental state is in need of help..SERIOUS HELP!

No wonder when I tried to speak to my cousin C, YOUR DAUGHTER..she told me I WAS the only SANE person in the family! Because for her entire life YOU told them lies and falsification about the family! NO the Sippel/Herr family isn’t perfect NO family is…but DAMN IT Joan GROW UP! GET OVER IT AND GET OVER YOUR WARPED DELUSION…I NEVER TALKED TO YOU AT 13..btw dumbass I was 15!! I talked to AUNT RUTH!! I always talked to AUNT RUTH!!!! MY SITUATION BACK IN THE 1980’S HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR ADOPTION HOW DARE YOU PUT IT IN PRINT!!

HOW DARE YOU THINK OF YOURSELF SO HIGH AND MIGHTY!!! YOU’RE A SELF ADMITTED DRUGGIE WHO DRINKS HERSELF INTO PASSING OUT.. (Ruth’s note: yes, she admits this in her book). WHAT A WONDERFUL LIFE YOUR CHILDREN MUST HAVE HAD..DID THEY COME HOME TO FIND YOU DRUNK AND DRUGGED DAILY?? I WONDER!!! (YOU) SPREAD SUCH LIES ABOUT MY FAMILY! MUST BE THE DRUGS AND DRINK THAT MAKE YOU SAY AND DO WHAT YOU DO. GET HELP FOR YOUR ADDICTIONS!!

YOU DIDN’T EVEN ASK ME IF I WANTED THE WORLD TO KNOW MY PRIVATE BUSINESS. HOW DARE YOU SAY HALF OF WHAT YOU DO!! YOU SHOULD OUT RIGHT BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF AND NO WONDER A REAL PUBLISHER WOULDN’T PUBLISH YOUR BOOK! YOU HAD TO PAY TO PUBLISH IT!!

I HOPE TO GODDESS I NEVER SEE YOU AGAIN IN PERSON, I WOULD SPIT IN YOUR FACE! I AM DISGUSTED THAT YOU’RE EVEN RELATED TO ME, SUCH SICK VENGEANCE–AND THAT IS WHAT YOUR BOOK IS ABOUT – NOT ADOPTION. IN MY OPINION– WILL UNDOUBTEDLY LEAD TO DELUSIONS LIKE YOURS AND LEAVING YOU ON THE OUTSIDE OF BOTH YOUR FAMILIES. (Ruth’s note: she already IS on the outside, because of her past evil-doings to everyone). NO WONDER BOTH YOUR ADOPTED FAMILY AND NATURAL WANT NOTHING TO YOU WITH YOU… GET A LIFE ALREADY..GET A REAL EDUCATION…I DID AT 43 I GRADUATED COLLEGE…. I AM DISGUSTED BY YOUR WRITINGS AND ABOUT HOW YOU PORTRAY OUR FAMILY! YOUR UNGRATEFUL FOR THE LIFE YOU HAVE/HAD AND YOU WHINE AND BITCH ALL THE TIME..GET OVER IT CHANGE YOUR OWN LIFE!! For being so open minded you show such closed mindedness about everything if one doesn’t agree with you! GET OVER IT! Guess that covers my rant for now..lol.

Comments»

1. Sharry – May 13, 2010 [Edit]

Good job Karen! You too, Ruth!

Reply
2. chayeletMay 13, 2010 [Edit]

Way to go girls!

Reply
3. Gert – May 14, 2010 [Edit]

a well placed rant is good to release pent up anger

what ever has happen and will happen to Joan is all her own doing, her house of cards is coming apart, people see the truth, they don’t need Joan’s fabrications based on her hate.

there is more coming, so stay tuned you don’t want to miss the fun!

Reply
4. RuthMay 14, 2010 [Edit]

Karen writes: “I NEVER TALKED TO YOU AT 13..btw dumbass I was 15!! ”

Karen, you have to understand that Joan lives in her own fantasy world, where peoples ages, thoughts and personalities are not the same in the real world. Same thing with events. Joan lives events, but interprets them differently than normal people. And when she tells about an event, or a person, it spoken with Joan-Fantasy-Language.

This is why the book Forbidden Family is NOT truthful. Joan is a neurotic. She is a pathological liar. She is incapable of telling the truth. For example on page 306, she describes the event in July 1992, where my father threw her out of his house (apartment). She says “He didn’t let me in. I stood in the hallway just six inches from the open door.” Two paragraphs down, she says that Dad “took both hands, placed them on my shoulders,turned me around and shoved me out of the doorway.”
Did she not just say she was 6 inches away from the doorway? lol. In the paranormal field, this is known as “bi-location.” Joan is a comic book character! She can exist in two locations at the same time! Actually Data and Captain Picard did the same thing on two different episodes of Star Trek The Next Generation, and so did The Flash in a DC comic book. But Joan is not in a comic book, nor a science-fiction tv show. She ought to be in a fantasy movie, because that is how her mind works: in a fantasy!

So much for the TRUTH in this so-called book of non-fiction. This book belongs on the shelf with other sci-fi/fantasy books. There is no truth in the book at all.

To refresh your faulty memory Joan, Karen was 15 when all that stuff happened. Go make yourself a nice cup of mellow chamomile tea and ponder this. If she was born in late 1966, how old would she be in early 1982? I am assuming you can still do basic arithmetic. If not, go get a calculator.

You really do need to lay off the sauce. Stop drinking so much dam alchohol and try herbal teas. Then go and write a book that makes some dam sense.

superlative silly phrases and bad timing (bad event followups) do not make a good writer May 10, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags:
comments closed

A reader of the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler just emailed me and wondered if Joan o the year of the Space Shuttle Challenger wrong on page 257. So I decided to take a look at page 257. Her mistake is that at the top of the paragraph, she is talking about December 1985. She does jump to January 28, and talks about the Challenger. But she doesn’t clarify that a change in year takes place. A good writer would have. Don’t make your reader search for information in previous paragraphs, it pulls their focus from what you are trying to tell them.

I noticed another writing mistake by Joan throughout the entire book. She has a  propensity for describing hand movements too much.
She has Kathy slapping her thighs. She describes the fictitous visit by Prof. Rene Hoksbergen to my house and I am pumping my arms. lol
Other people are sweeping their hands palm down, palm up to the sky! Try that one: PALM UP TO THE NIGHT SKY. It hurts the wrist. It is not a natural movement. And she was using that in describing a rant and rave by her then boyfriend Jimmy, another sick individual.  He was ranting and she has sweeping his palm up to the night sky. A person who is ranting does not do that.

By the way, she says she first met him in 1991, looked into his eyes, saw his soul, and fell in love. Um, weren’t you MARRIED at this time my dear? You are supposed to love your husband, not some idiot. — Around page 440, she is deep in a relationship with a sicko, who has a violent temper, who even hit his own dog. And she stayed with him. She writes how frightened she was, his outbursts in public places, his degrading comments to her. What woman who professed to be a Woman’s Rights Advocate puts up this shit? oh of course, this is just another way for us to read about it and say, “oh,  poor Joan, look what she had to put up with.” Oh Baloney. Leave the jerk. You stay in an abusive relationship. — Hey, Joan, I thought you said that you looked into his eyes and saw his soul. (neat trick there – I wanna learn it). Anyway, if you had seen his soul, you would have known he was an asshole. lol “seen his soul.” Stop writing such silly phrases. Is this an intelligent book on adoption, adoption reunion, adoption reform, or is it a Harlequin Romance?  

People sweeping their arms and hands around have nothing to do with what she is trying to say. And for the life of me, I can’t figure just what the hell she is trying to say. She is always insulted by something or somebody. (does nothing in this world make her happy?)

The latest whine from liar Joan Wheeler May 9, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

All thru her book, it’s poor poor Joanie. EVERYBODY is out to get her. From the time she was an infant, she has been mentally used and abused. Her book details harrasing phone calls and letters she has received. Does she document in her book the harassing phone calls, letters and false accusations that SHE has performed? ha ha, of course not. Joan is perfect. Joan has never hung up the phone on anyone. (yeah right). Joan has never made a pest out of herself. (yeah right).

Oh poor poor Joanie. She was denied the chance to grieve her birth mother’s loss. Guess what sweetie, so was I! And my sisters. You don’t see us whining about it! Joan whines continuously about her mother in her book. And I have to agree, that woman is toxic, toxic, toxic. But Joan stays in that toxic relationship.

Why? Because she has no money to support herself. Why? Because she wouldn’t get a dam job all those years ago. So she took the trade off. Live with her mother, who treated her and her kids like dirt. She says so right in the book! Nice. Instead of providing a HAPPY home for herself and her children, she choose to stay in a toxic relationship. You can’t help people like that. They whine about their sad lot in life. But won’t do anything to improve their life. They will make a show of going to counseling, but what counseling is not about a counselor waving a magic wand and saying, “now, go, your life is fixed.” No, YOU have to do the work. YOU have to face your demons that is making behave in such a manner that people don’t want anything to do with you. YOU have to make the change.

In 54 years, Joan has been browbeaten by that domineering, contradictory woman. Joan says herself in her book that HER OWN ADOPTIVE MOTHER SENT HARASSMENT LETTERS TO HER. (and I bet those are the ones that I got the blame for). In reading Joan’s book the sick co-dependency of these two woman, I get the feeling that person who placed the child abuse call on Joan in December 1994 was her mother. It was a clear engineering to get ME in trouble with my husband. And make no mistake, that woman HATED me, I don’t know why. Right on the top of page 300 Joan quotes her mother “That’s what’s wrong with your sisters. They didn’t have a mother and look how they turned out.” This was in 1992. When Joan was describing in her book a whole fight that didn’t happen, but the words came out of Dorothy’s mouth. And way before the “gloves were thrown down and the real fighting began. But the fighting was because of Joan’s own harassment of me.

So getting back to how Dorothy comments on how I turned out. How I turned out? How dare you Dorothy? How do you dare pass judgement on me? When just two years before, YOUR daughter stole money from me. In 1984, YOUR daughter went to a rock concert in Kitchener Ontario, and there was a pool table party. And she was married for just over a year! With an infant son at home! In 1989 YOUR daughter was supplementing the family income via a very unlady-like means. YOUR daughter, in 1992, showed up drunk at my house at 5 am one Sunday after being with a folksinger on tour from England. And how does Joan even dare to even quote her mother as saying that? thanks for sticking up for your blood kin dear sister.

How I turned out? ok, I have had the same dam job for 37, going on 38 years. Joan doesn’t even have a job. I have had the total of 5 sexual partners in my entire life, 2 from 1975, those being my two wonderful husbands. . I couldn’t hazard a guess as to Joan’s tally. I have NEVER called ANYBODY’S job trying to get them fired over a false accusation. Joan did this to me, her own blood kin. I have never stolen money from anybody, Joan did from me.

So in the interest of basic human rights, of which, Joan has trampled on mine, time and time again, I am posting Dick’s article here. Read it and learn. AND WOULD SOMEBODY TEACH THESE THINGS TO JOAN, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY HER MOTHER NEVER TAUGHT THE WOMAN BASIC MORALS.

 I MAY NOT HAVE HAD A MOTHER, BUT I DON’T STEAL, I DON’T LIE, I DON’T CHEAT ON MY HUSBAND (neither one). AND I KEEP MY BODY PURE. So take your sanctimonious preaching Dorothy and shove it where the sun don’t shine. Because me and my sisters turned out a hell of a lot better than YOUR daughter.

Now as to Joan’s latest whine to her adoption friends that she spent Easter looking for a lawyer to sue me. (um Easter is on a Sunday, and lawyers don’t work on a Sunday). Well, Joan, whine and threaten me. Go ahead , get a lawyer to sue me for harassing you via this blog. What civil rights of MINE have YOU violated with that trashy book of yours. Hey lawyer! Hear MY side of the story. How Joan published MY picture on the back of her book WITHOUT MY PERMISSION! I want compensation for that Joan. No lawyer in hell will touch you because YOU broke the law!

YOU have violated my civil rights. Go ahead, lecture Sara from Illinois, but why don’t you take your advice? How dare you violate MY civil rights with that lie-filled book, and my blog contains court records that show you for the liar you are. Come see me lawyer, hear the truth. Joan is lying to you. The harassment that occurs is JOAN’S lies. She says she has “multiple orders of protection” against me. THIS IS A LIE. AND I HAVE THE COURT DOCUMENTS ON THIS BLOG TO PROVE IT.    (click on link to see them) Joan is the one harassing people with lies of this sort. so go ahead and get a lawyer Joan. I want to see you in court. Let’s go. They will tell you to stop publication of that lying book that has MY picture that you used WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. You want to play with fire, I’m a Leo, a fire sign. Let’s have at it!

MY civil rights are violated in that lying book of hers. Like Joan publishing that comment that her mother said about how I turned out. And telling people that I have been arrested and have a criminal record. Joan, my dear, that is slander and libel. So you want a lawyer? Let’s see how a judge will react when they read that crap in your book, and research my “criminal record.” My dear, you are going to make yourself to look the fool that you are. You really want to go there? Like I said, let’s have at it! Better prove your claims in your book. Like how you have “multiple orders of protection against me.” Really? Just because you conveniently burned your belongings in your lviing room, ( a sign of mental instability), doesn’t mean that can’t be researched. Court documents, my dear, are not destroyed. I have the docket numbers, silly, and they will back up MY truth: that you had only ONE order of protection against me, for 6 months, and it was on condition, and then dismissed, so in reality, you didn’t have even ONE. You want to play lawyer with me? You want to sue me? I will halt publication of your book and have all royalties turned over to me, because YOU violated MY civil rights in it. So I will expect to see in court? Let’s go. Don’t threaten, DO!

Don’t whine, and stop contradicting yourself. I never called child abuse on you. And the call was NOT about that YOU sexually abused your children. The report, and I have already scanned and posted YOUR letter to Albany, New York, that the call was that my boyfriend and you had sex in front of your kids and you and your mom forced them to watch. And no, I did not make that call. Why would I call child abuse, give them MY name, and further say that MY fiance, FIANCE, not “boyfriend” is having sex with you. um, silly, that’s the guy I was engaged to marry, and did marry. Why would I want to risk him going to jail? No, no, you had that part right in your post to your adoptee buddies: I am claiming that it was YOU who made that child abuse call, to break me and John up. But now that I read how mentally sick your mother has been, and how you write in your book how she sent harassing letters to you, I’m beginning to wonder. Who did make that call? Your mother hated me. Why? I don’t know. When I was the one who supported you and her during her husband’s illness and death. I showed nothing but respect to her. And I got kicked in the teeth by her. Wouldn’t surprise one dam bit  if was her who made that call.

click here to see the letter Joan wrote to Albany. And see the letters Joan wrote to my then fiance, now husband, and his mother, in an attempt to discredit me in their eye and to break me and John up. Who was harassing whom in 1994-1995, mmmm Joan? YOU were harassing ME. YOU were pissing on me back them. So take your whining and shove it!  Any visitors from the adoption forum that Joan sent over here: yeah, take a good look at your buddy. And “sweet” Mara, are you that dim that you don’t recognize a sarcastic slam? And why are YOU telling Joan not to read this blog, when YOU are clearly reading it. No, “Sweeeet” Mara, I think you are nothing close to sweet. You are a filthy mouthed troll. And no, Mara, our family was NOT torn apart by and because of Joan’s adoption. she wants credit for everything. No, my father remarried a few months after our mom died. His second wife was mentally ill, and the times she was in the hospital, was when we were in the foster home and orphanage.

AFTER we were reunited with Joan in 1974, our family was STILL not torn apart. JOAN was asked to leave because of all the pissing she did on us: like stealing, meddling, being an out and out bitch. But you adoptees LIKE being bitches don’t you? You are so angry with the world because you were adopted. oh boo hoo. MY mother died when I was 3, and I never knew her. You don’t see ME being a bitch to everyone. Joan wants to punish the whole world, including me for her adoption. I was a three year old kid for god’s sake. And when we were adults, I refused to have a liar and a thief, and a harasser around me. If our family was torn apart, how do you account for this blog, where we siblings are sticking together? As you see, Joan speaks with a forked tongue called Joan-Fantasy-Language. If you like that sort of person, you are as sick as she is.

So there you have it. The latest on poor poor Joan, “my sisters are pissing on me.” Joan’s whole dam book was a piss session on ME and my sisters.
And won’t a lawyer and a judge like to hear that!

Comments»

1. Sharry – May 9, 2010 [Edit]

Good job, Ruth!

Reply
2. chayeletMay 9, 2010 [Edit]

As one of the ‘notorious’ Sippel Sisters, I, too, grew up without my mother, and I resent the statement attributed to Dorothy Wheeler by her adoptive daughter, my birth sister, about how I and my sisters ‘turned out’, implying we have turned out to be scum. Yes, Dorothy, and JW for that matter, just look at how we turned out-not bad at all if I must say so myself.

Growing up in foster care was not the same as growing up within the family unit, but our foster parents treated us with respect and taught us good morals.But we were left wanting in the social skills department, and, once out in the world, had to fend for ourselves-that included learning those social skills as we went along. I cannot speak for Ruth or Gert, but, for myself, as soon as I became of age and could act for myself, I sought a different way of life in another country- I have lived in the UK for 37 years-if I have turned out so badly, I’m sure the good people of my adoptive (there’s that word again) country would have booted me out long ago. But here I am, still plugging away, able to look people in the eye, able to look my own soul in the eye, and know that, so far at least, I have done the best I could given any set of circumstances, without doing deliberate harm to anyone.

I converted to Judaism some years ago. Judaism strongly believes that although the world is far from perfect, it can be improved. What is more, Judaism teaches that in a very real sense, we human beings are co-creators with G-d of the world, and, therefore, it is our duty to help Him perfect it. This concept is called Tikkun Olam- healing the world (source:Judaism- a Religion of Deeds and Ideals, by David C Gross,1992, Hippocrene Books, Inc).

For myself, I choose to practise Tikkun Olam through my music, or rather I should say, I have been given the opportunity of healing the world through my music, and being involved in the Jewish, and wider, communities. I am not a goody-goody-two shoes, but neither am I scum.

The greatest gift you give others is the example of your own life working. What an example we have in the lives and attitudes of Dorothy and Joan Wheeler-no, thank you. I’ll stick to mine.

Yes, just see how the Three Sisters turned out, and how JW turned out-I begin to see a secret back-handed compliment to us in that statement by Dorothy Wheeler- I humbly thank you from the bottom of my heart!

Reply
3. chayeletMay 9, 2010 [Edit]

As to JW’s lawyer-baiting- I’m with Ruth- I want compo for use of my image on the back of that book without permission and slander/libel, so yes, bring it on J Baby-I’m waiting.

Standing up for oneself is also a form of Tikkun Olam, and is an example of one who can look oneself and one’s soul in the eye. Can you, J Baby?

I don’t need YOUR approval to write about things pertaining to MY life. May 8, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Uncategorized.
comments closed

If you do not like what you see here, why then are you a subscriber to this blog? Mr. Singh, I respect your opinion. Obviously you do not respect MY opinion that pertains to MY own life. I will not approve your comments anymore, because I do not need YOUR preaching to me and YOUR approval of what I write about MY own life.

I suggest you read those 11 Basic Human Rights provided by Mr. Sutphen, like #7. You have the right to offer no excuses or justification for your decisions or behavior. and #11. You have the right to defend yourself.

As my sister Kathy said to you: you do not know me or my sisters. You are NOT familiar with my family. And the purpose of this blog is to get that information out. If you cannot understand this, or will not, then I suggest you find another blog to attach yourself to.

by the way, Jab, or Mr. Singh, I caught you in a lie. In your first comment on this blog on March 28, you said you were from India and are about the same age. NOW you say you live in the US and you are 73. Make up your mind what country you are from. Ok, granted, you are from India, but you didn’t specify which country you live in now. And you are no where the same age as me. I am 57.  And that is listed here on my blog. go away now troll.

.1. chayeletMay 8, 2010 [Edit]

Mr Singh:
With the greatest respect, I do not think you read, or understood, my reply to your comment in April-what my sisters and I are doing is exercising our human right to defend ourselves and our reputation.

You suggest we hone in on some useful/purposeful direction-I agree with you- we would all 3 of us prefer to concentrate on other things, but, I’m sure you will agree that, by seeking to correct the balance of ‘propaganda’ against us, we are doing the very thing you advise us to do! Has it occurred to you that we may, through our writings, be giving strength to someone out there who has gone through something similar and doesn’t know how to proceed?

I am intrigued that you say you have ‘been exposed to this family’-excuse me, have we met? Do you know any of us personally, or are you just preaching. You seem inordinately interested in our souls-well, speaking for myself, my soul is very well, thank you very much. My soul knows right from wrong, and also knows that, before I can help others I must stand up and fight for myself.

The greatest gift you give others is the example of your own life working-my life is just fine, Mr Singh, precisely because I can look my soul in the eye and know I’ve done, and continue to do, something to make a difference. Remember, also, Mr Singh, this is an ongoing situation which , by our writings, we hope to bring to a conclusion-but we cannot do that unless, and until, we have our say too. You wouldn’t be telling us we don’t have the right, do you? Fair’s fair y’know.

Reply
RuthMay 8, 2010 [Edit]

Mr. Singh as been removed as a subscriber to this blog and his comments are now categorized as spam. As the owner of this blog, I have the right to do this.
Mr. Singh, I have respectfully listened to your comments in the past and posted them. You latest comment was disrespectful to me and my sisters.
By suggesting that going to church is going to resolve the issue we have with Joan, you are sadly mistaken. I have gone to church. In the past 30 years, I have done much praying on this situation. I have appealed to Divinity. I have appealed to law enforcement agencies. I have appealed to the courts. Joan continues in her smear campaign, telling people that I, Ruth Pace, have a criminal record. This is damaging to me and my reputation, should I explore a career in politics or law enforcement.
Mr. Singh, you do NOT know me. I have never met anyone named Singh. For you to say you are familiar with my family tells me that you are either a liar, or an acquaintance of Joan Wheeler.
Mr. Singh, you do NOT have the right to preach to me. You can tell me that you disagree with me, but do so respectfully. To tell me how I should live my life, sir, you went overboard. Goodbye sir.

Comments»

1. Kym – May 8, 2010 [Edit]

I don’t know the situation about which you are talking, but I fully support your right to speak freely on your own blog, and to ban trouble-makers.
I don’t try to tell anyone how to live, except when I know that someone is going to do something that is either physically or psychologically dangerous. in that case, I warn them, but I cannot control what they do.
I try to life my life in a way that is an example of what I believe. I am Wiccan. and my strongest beliefs are that I should do no harm to anyone, or anything, and that none should do harm to me.
I have absolute freedom of thought and action, and I take responsibility for my thoughts and my actions. I believe that everyone should that. but I cannot tell anyone that they HAVE to.
may the Goddess bless you and give you peace.
Kym

Reply
RuthMay 9, 2010 [Edit]

thank you Kym
the situation is that a “gentleman” from India has made 2 comments in the past about this blog’s content and suggested we sort of “turn the other cheek” when it comes to the rotten stuff that my youngest sister has written about me, my other 2 sisters, and my whole family, in a self-published book.
I set up this blog, and with contibutions from my 2 older sisters, we are defending our reputations and trying to correct the damage that our sister has done to our reputations. We have that right. I respectfully approved this man’s comments, and I and one of my sisters, respectfully wrote disagreeing statements to him. We kept our responses in good taste. But yesterday, this man suggested we need to go to church and we need to find a better way to live our lives. Then he said, that he is 73, he lives in India, but he has lived in the United States and in England, and is familiar with us and our family.

Neither i, nor my sister know this man. I have never met anyone of Indian descent, so clearly this man does not know our family. If he is “familiar” with my family, he is either a liar, or he is a friend of our younger sister, the person we are defending ourselves against.
In either case, he is nothing but a troublemaker. And is no longer welcome here.
Thank you for your support Kym. Once again, I stand up to bullies. I will NOT be dominated by them anymore.

Reply
2. RuthMay 9, 2010 [Edit]

okay, I did my detective work. I looked up Mr. Singh IP address and it is coming from San Francisco. I have never been in San Fransicso in my life! I once was in Anaheim for 2 days, and spent one afternoon in Newport Beach. But that was a long time ago, and never met nor befriended anyone of Indian descent whilst there. Therefore this person does NOT know me, and has no right to comment on my life or the way I live it.
As I suspected, when he said he is familiar with this family, he is probably familair thru Joan Wheeler’s inaccurate representations of me and my family.
Mr. Singh, and I doubt that is your real name, as your email says jabdhilon, if you want to believe Joan’s lies, and not hear the other side of the story, then I suggest you suck up some more to her and Mara. You obviouslly came here from Joan and Mara’s adoption forum to spy on us and stir up trouble. No need to spy, Joan, Jab, and Mara: this is an open blog.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

THE 11 HUMAN RIGHTS by Dick Sutphen – submitted by Ruth Pace. and applying to them to a liar like Joan Wheeler May 8, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

For a number of years, I have read articles and listened to self-hypnosis, self-help tapes from Dick Sutphen. dicksutphen.com  I receive a weekly newsletter in my email from Dick and his wife Tara. I also attended a couple of seminars from Dick and Tara in Lilydale, NY.

Joan’s book Forbidden Family is full of such angst, such torment. She is such a tormented soul. Have her years in therapy done anything? Apparently not. A person can be addicted to therapy. They can WANT to be in therapy and NOT WANT to get better. This is to perpetuate the victim mindset. The sympathy ploy.

So in the interest of basic human rights, of which, Joan has trampled on mine, time and time again, I am posting Dick’s article here. Read it and learn. AND WOULD SOMEBODY TEACH THESE THINGS TO JOAN, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY HER MOTHER NEVER TAUGHT THE WOMAN BASIC MORALS. 

THE 11 HUMAN RIGHTS by Dick Sutphen This month, I’ve received a couple requests to post my “11 Human Rights,” so here they are. These rights allow for expression instead of repression. The assertive individual grants them to all others while demanding them for himself.

1. You have the right to do anything as long as you do not purposely hurt someone else and you are willing to accept the consequences.

2. You have the right to maintain your self-respect by answering honestly even it does hurt someone else (as long as you are being assertive rather than aggressive.)

3. You have the right to be what you are without changing your ideas or behavior to satisfy someone else.

4. You have the right to strive for self-actualization (to be all you can be).

5. You have the right to use your own judgment as to the need priorities of yourself and others, if you decide to accept any responsibility for another’s problem.

6. You have the right not to be subjected to negativity.

7. You have the right to offer no excuses or justification for your decisions or behavior.

8. You have the right not to care.

9. You have the right to be illogical.

10. You have the right to change your mind.

11. You have the right to defend yourself.

 Live your life doing things because you want to do them or because as a personal value judgment or compromise, you have agreed to do them. Any decision resulting in loss of self-respect is unacceptable. Do not do things because they are expected of you or because you think you should or because you will feel anxious or guilty if you don’t.

Assertion is commonly mistaken for aggression, but understand that to be assertive means that you are standing up for your basic human rights. Aggression is a matter of forcefully violating the rights of another, and there is no excuse for such behavior.

An important part of assertiveness is showing consideration for the feelings and rights of others, without letting your kindness or empathy be used as an opening for manipulation. Realize that background conditioning has made everyone good at manipulation and people will use your vulnerability as an opening. The better they know you, the better they know your vulnerable areas. So, the assertive individual becomes an expert at expressing his rights, needs and feelings in a kind way. She shows equal respect for the same rights, needs and feelings of others.

People often avoid being assertive because they feel others will dislike or avoid them if they speak up and say what they really feel. That is not a rational justification for allowing yourself to be manipulated. If, by any chance, someone stopped liking you because you said “no,” are you going to miss their friendship? If you are one of the millions who go through life thinking that a wrong word, refusal or assertion is going to end a relationship, it is time to realize that is simply not how things work. Such thinking is usually based on such a strong need to be liked that you sacrifice your own self-respect, often without realizing it. You also probably fail to distinguish between being liked and being respected.

Now is the time to become an assertive individual. You have basic human rights that others are going to have to learn to respect, just as you will respect their rights. As a free, assertive individual, you will actually learn to give and take more fairly than ever before, thus becoming of more service to yourself and others. Now is the time to become relaxed about revealing yourself through your words and actions and to begin to communicate openly, directly, and honestly with the people in your life.

**************

Forbidden Family or Forbidden Child by Gert McQueen, April 1, 2010 May 7, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

‘The evil life is really the thoughtless life’….The Dhammapada

‘The superior man seeks what is right; the inferior one, what is profitable.’ ….Confucius

Forbidden family or forbidden child? Why would anyone who adopts a child what to possess that child? Joan’s adoptive parents failed her because of their possessiveness and fear of losing her. Why would anyone (Joan) think that they could change adoption laws by showing the world all their inner torment and faulty reasoning? It actually will do the reverse; this book will never be taken seriously by anyone that can alter laws. If any laws ought to be changed it would be a more stringent review of the prospective parents. Having adopted my son I know that there are extensive background checks but nothing can really uncover the mental processes of people…until it is too late.

As I showed in my last post, Joan had shown very early on that she has some serious mental issues in her life. Why did she not get help? Because her adopted parents did get it for her because they did not see the signs because they had serious mental issues themselves. What I find fascinating is that Joan has no sense of personal shame; she just lays it all out, bearing all, for the world to see, her inner tormented self. This book is not about adoption or adoption reform and social activism, it’s a vanity piece for Joan’s inner world to take center stage in all its ugliness because she was forbidden to be from very early in her life! But if she thinks that this book will help the ‘cause’ of changing adoption rules, she is sadly mistaken. Showing the world how adoption affected your (Joan’s) inner life will not change the laws.

 Pg 90 early signs of anxiety, panic, agitation, worry, and inability to tell people how she feels. When she does describe her feelings or about things she would like to spend time on, she has a strange use of words, such as on pg 91 ‘I salvaged some time each week…’ Salvaged? Why not put aside some time, or took some time, or looked forward to some time? Salvaged!

Even when she is describing events that should be joyful and calm or when she learns about her adoption, she always describes then in terms of inner torment. Pg 92, ‘…felt an agonizing sense of recognition, instantly repulsed at the level of betrayal…’ She sees herself as the ‘victim’; everything is seen from that victim’s eyes.

Pg 93 ‘…filled with resentment…I was ostracized…when I alone I huddled…crying…felt lonely even when with people…started smoking pot…didn’t like to but did it anyway…was out of control and depressed.’ Where is her self-esteem? If she didn’t have it at age 18 before she met the birth family, where do you think she lost it? Where were her adoptive parents while she was smoking pot in her room?

Pg 95 is an ex. of how Joan invents stories to fit in with her view of herself and those around her; for this vanity piece. It is 1974 just before she goes to college, she tells that I, her eldest birth sister, my children and my boy friend, went to the cemetery to visit our mother’s grave. She states that ‘the adults took a few puffs on a joint to get stoned. I shouldn’t have done it and felt uncomfortable, but Irma (that’s me) brought it out, she insisted…it would ease the pain and I went along with her lead. She was the eldest in the family and I looked up to her.’

All totally wrong, never happened. Number 1, my boyfriend never went with us to the cemetery. Number 2, I never smoked pot nor had a drink with my children around; my children never knew anything about such things until in their teens, in 1974 they were 8 and 9. My children’s natural father, at that time my ex-husband, had intimidated me for years that he would take the children from me. I virtually lived ‘in fear’ that he would do such a thing and therefore lived a very ‘low-profile’ life-style, something that Joan has no concept of. Number 3, she had already admitted that ‘she smoked pot’ on pg 93 so why is she trying to blame me that she smoked?

Not only has she fabricated a story; she makes it look like I made her do it, for what possible reason? Joan again proves, by her own words of lies, that she has no boundaries and no consideration for other people. How dare she put into print that I smoked pot! Has she no sense of the consequences of her words and deeds to other people? If she is capable of lying about her own family members just what is she capable of with her ‘adoptive friends’? Would you trust her?

Then there’s more melodrama! Actually the pages 96-101, where she details the family histories are quite fascinating, that is what adoption reunions are supposes to be about, family histories, not all of Joan’s melodramas. But it becomes quite apparent that it is within the Wheeler family where the troubles originated. The main source of trouble and later harassment is shown on pg 99, it is the adoptive father’s brother, John Wheeler, if that is his correct name. It is things that he does later, to Joan, which my sisters and I get the blame for. It is also quite interesting to note the family dynamics at work within the Wheeler family. The antagonism is palpable, the intimidations, the betrayals; all learned and practiced within the Wheeler family complex long before Joan knew she was part of our family! Joan is the product of her upbringing; she has no real claim on the Herr/Sippel families.

On pg 99 she has a ‘confrontation’ with an adoptive uncle and she fully describes how she took from his pocket a document claiming that it was hers…and she wonders why he took ‘revenge’ later! On pg 101 she again shows her amoral character, she sneaks around waiting for the ‘appropriate’ time to take ‘it was mine now and stealing didn’t bother me.’ She speaks with contempt for her adoptive parents, ‘rage burned inside me…why did they do this to me…deceive me…felt cheated out of life…deliberately kept away from…’ She says, ‘an unseen force had been destroying my self-confidence and self-respect…making me feel worthless, unwanted and unloved.’ And this is how one talks about people who raised her for 18 years! It’s me, me, me, with no respect for the people who fed her, changed her diapers and for 18 years provided for her. Shame, shame, shame!

In chapter 12 as she begins college she ‘self-defines’ herself, she ‘wasn’t normal…filled with anxiety’. Even in written communications with adoptive parents she can not let go of her hatred for them; she feels the mother ‘played God’. Remember this people because it is a learned behavior and Joan has ‘played God’ many times to many people, I know what I speak. Even when a relative dies and she has to go home for a funeral she is selfish; ‘grandma couldn’t have picked a worse time to die’!

It is in college where she begins to learn about adoption laws with research in a Family Dynamics course. This is also where she is introduced to and indoctrination into militarist activism along with radical feminism and Political Correctness, or PCism, all of which are the banes of modern society. It is my opinion, clearly labeled here, that the beginning of the breakdown of civil society was spawned by radical feminism and PCism and it has brought us to the sorry state of our present social discourse where rudeness and crudeness seems to be all that we know how to act whether it be in person or on the Net!

 Like it or not everyone’s family is what it is, that is the nature of ‘being’ in the human race. It does no good to be judgmental about what your family is or isn’t nor does it do any good to try to get members of your family to ‘fit’ the picture that you think they should be. Joan has a view of what life and everyone’s part in it should be and well, it’s all about her. She can’t accept that people have different views from her and she is quick to condemn another for their ‘mistakes’. Case in point, pg 107, where after she receives a letter from President Ford, she is ‘…bothered by the president’s misperceptions…his use of the word ‘real’ to describe his natural father and his use of the phrase ‘the only father I ever had’. Oh, she is more aware of the use of proper words than the President of the USA! But then she admits that ‘…since I was new at this …I shouldn’t expect him ….to be aware of the fledgling adoption reform movement…’ How magnanimous of her! And ‘if I only had tried (with the President) I wonder what would have happened.’ Boy does she have visions of her own self-importance; she was just way ahead of her time!

Let’s go back a bit here with what is meant by ‘the only father I ever had’; substitute any form of parent, mother, stepparent, foster-parent etc. Just what is the problem with that statement or sentiment? I had foster-parents from the ages of 10 to 18 and they were wonderful and gave me many insights into how parents behave. I’m not saying everything was great, but over the years, I have come to have great respect for the job they did, not only for myself and my siblings but also for the many other foster children they cared for. I am put off by Joan’s insistence that those that are ‘other’ than birth parents have no real standing in the parenting department.

 Pg 108 is another example of flat out lies. Joan states ‘…eldest sister (that’s me), her boyfriend and children came to….college to drive me home…family reunion…in Jamestown.’ Again, truth is, I did not go to get her and take her anywhere, neither did my boyfriend nor my children and don’t recall any reunion in Jamestown or any other place that I attended! On pg 110 she clearly states that ‘on the drive home with B, cousin G and Aunt C…’ If I took her to this reunion why did I not take her back home, why did she go back with others? No, I didn’t go somewhere else because I never was there in the first place! In March of 2010, I spoke with my children; they said they were not at this so-called event. My boyfriend, at that time, is dead; he was sick most of 1974/5, did not go many places with me and died in 76. All these details about what happened at a reunion, that I never went to, is presented only to show that Joan was finally getting attention, she ‘felt like a celebrity’, never mind that she lies to make up the story.

Again why does she have to retell intimate family sentiments, be they good, bad or ugly? It is no one’s business outside of the family. Details and individual feelings and opinions about other family members stay within the family, but Joan doesn’t take other people into consideration, she hears a tale she must repeat it. In all her attempts at getting information from families, both adoptive and birth, she exhibits all kinds of inappropriate responses. She thinks that adults have to tell their children everything and if they don’t she is betrayed. She is too thin-skinned, can’t handle people who act abruptly, jumps to quick conclusions without thinking and resents having to spend so much time getting to know birth family and getting answers from adoptive family. Gee, I thought she wanted the truth, so why is she resentful? It’s like she wants her cake and be able to eat it too. She is so inconvenienced by it all! Forget about truth, it is her own perceptions that are important. When she doesn’t get her way she is ‘confused and angry…lashed out at those closest to me…screamed with rage…my out of control behavior…’ It’s all about Joan and she is all about drama! Hey she has to sell the book, you know!

When Joan is dealing with others, non-family members, she is the nicest, sweetest, loveliest person promoting of all things, truth! see pg 113. But she doesn’t understand family members’ non-interest in the adoption issues; she has to point out that I ‘complained that adoption wasn’t her (my) thing’. Is there a point here?

On pg 114 Joan finally finds the Adoptees Liberty Movement Association and ‘a militant with more than her fair share of enemies’, sounds like Joan met her hero! Pg 115, ‘…the confusion and rage within me began to consume me and change me into a radical adoptee….that militant part of me grew in ways that were unhealthy … I turned against all adoptive parents, feeling they were totally wrong and were to blame for causing devastating problems for their adoptees…’ And this was her justification to make me be wrong when I adopted my own son in 1981!

Too bad for me and my family isn’t it that she didn’t ‘…recover from this negative stage until….walked into my life in 1981…where my militant aggression has been re-directed away from adoptive parents toward lawmakers and policy makers.’ The damage Joan began in 1980-81 to my family was only the beginning. As she ends this chapter, both in the book and in her life, of 1974, as the ‘Honeymoon Stage of Reunion’, the Honeymoon is over stage has only just began. Stay tuned!

%d bloggers like this: