A new discovery by Joan Wheeler…not! July 29, 2010Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Lessons in Life, mental illness.
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, blaming people for your own mess, contradictions, Disrespect, Lies, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, whining
by Gert McQueen
On Joan Wheeler’s site, which can be viewed without actually going onto the site, she posted, July 27, 2010, Newly Discovered Family Keepsake: 1956 Baby Shower Card. From want she posted she didn’t seem to find this discovery a pleasant one. Why you ask? Because it reminds her of her closed adoption and the damage it has done to her. Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn.
Joan Wheeler is an adoptee and my blood sibling, has again voiced her opinions on how adoption destroys people and of course she uses her own life, full of torment, as her reasons and proof. Hey, she ought to know, she wrote a book on the subject! She relishes being the victim, it is the AIR she breaths. Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn. It is utter stupefying how warped Joan’s mind works. Oh the whining! Oh the deception! Oh the frigging DRAMA. And the gnashing of teeth, the pulling of hair, the self-flagellations! That is Joan. Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn.
For the life of me, I don’t understand what Joan’s life has to do with adoption reform and how detailing her inner torment is a HELP to people. Would, could, anyone explain that to me? And she wants to talk about the effects of adoption on her siblings! What is she all-knowing? She really can not see any positive aspects of adoption. She is the victim, she is the adoptee. Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn.
And yes, the blood siblings know the effects that having a reunion with an adopted nutcase has caused our lives since 1974. The heart aches and the hurts that SHE has done to US (blood siblings) to punish US for her frigging adoption! Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn.
She needs to get a serious spiritual component in her life. She ignores the fact that she, like all of us, have been given life for a reason and it was not to live life as a victim! Ignorance is not bliss! Ignorance is dangerous, but knowledge (in this case adoption reform) is even more dangerous when mistaken and misguided. This is were Joan is and where anyone who listens to her will end up. She is dangerous and ignorant, what knowledge she has is mistaken and misguided! She is in darkness because she WANTS to be there. She can’t help anyone because she can’t help herself. She lacks humility, gives no respect and has proven herself to be an ass. btw. an ass is the symbol of stupidity.
She needs to go work on her soul. Who will be at Joan’s death bed? What wisdom and truth will Joan have when it’s her time to go? She can’t escape it you know. She needs to learn her lessons now. She needs to make the best of a bad bargain and get over it. She doesn’t have forever to be a victim.
I can speak on and on about Joan, but in all fairness we will use Joan’s own words to prove our points. We have been doing that right along with the ‘refuting’ of the book on this blog. So here is Joan’s ‘new discovery’ post (J: is Joan) along with my comments which begin with G: And some notes from Ruth!
After the introduction and showing pictures of baby cards Joan writes.
J: Evidently, as a child, I stole their hearts away.
G: every new baby does, that is one of the ways of being in the human family. Did she not do the same with her own children? Oh I forgot, they were not adopted, she gave birth to them, that is why she has treated them like dirt! Right from the get-go, in relationship to the baby cards, she is mocking the joy that a new baby brings to a family. Joan can not abide anyone having any joy over her life, not birth or adoptive families nor her own children, no one can have any joy related to Joan’s existence.
J: Definitely, they knowingly stole me from my family.
G: Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn. No one stole her, how absurd a statement is that! After much thought and consideration, by adults, that were for the betterment of her life, she was freely given and freely accepted. She was not stolen. There was no crime committed. This is Joan’s view point on a system that she can’t control. She is a professional victim and can only see life from those glasses.
J: I gained an adoptive family, but lost the family that I had.
G: She really ought to get a grip on reality! She didn’t lose. Would she have rather been placed in an orphanage or sold on the black market? Or how about being left abandoned on some street corner? It’s all about her, she lost. What about the birth family? Joan doesn’t realize that infants can’t make decisions and sometimes life sucks! No one ever promised her a rose garden.
Ruth: Nobody on this planet was ever promised a rose garden – you’re born – that’s it. Infants and children all over the world are at the mercy of the adults in their lives. Then they grow up and MAKE A LIFE FOR THEMSELVES- Question to Joan – did YOU provide a rose garden for YOUR own children? Hell no, in MY opinion, YOUR children had a worse life than YOU!
J: It is inhumane what was done to me and my siblings in the name of adoption.
G: How is it inhumane? There are many reasons for adopting. Her position of ‘open adoption’ could never work. The reason that it is called ‘closed adoption’ is for PROTECTION of all parties involved. No one can raise a child, knowing and believing that child is theirs, if some other parent (birth) is ALWAYS in the picture. A child can not comprehend such a thing as two sets of parents at the same time. It’s basic child development and psychology. Closed Adoption is very humane.
Ruth: What did Joan’s adoption do to me and my other siblings? NOTHING! What the heck is Joan rambling on about? Oh, because she was taken away from us? Please, considering what a screw-up she is, the Wheelers did us a favor. We were without her whining and trouble-making for 18 years.
J: They did it – my adoptive parents – knowingly, willfully and intentionally. They did it out of love. And with Jesus’ blessings. Good Catholics they were. And for this I am to be grateful.
G: She sounds like a prosecutor in a court room! They are condemed because they wanted a baby and they went about it LEGALLY, according to the laws of the country we live in. And she mocks again, the love the adopted parents had and she mocks their religious traditions that upheld them! Being Catholic has nothing to do with being adoptive. There’s religious bigotry in the heart of Joan. They could have been of any religion. The point here is that Joan, and only Joan, condemns the laws of the country and her adoptive parents for the crime of adopting her. Now that I think of it, she probably would have been better off left on a damn doorstep, a true orphan, and the two families would have been better for it!
J: No question about it, for me, there is no way to get through this pain but radical acceptance of the reality.
G: Now there’s a novel thought! But not likely to be done. Joan likes being the victim too much.
Ruth: Good god almighty! It has taken her 36 years to FINALLY reach this conclusion. But as Gert points out, it won’t get done, because Joan likes to play the victim too much. She wants people to feel sorry for her too much.
J: Do I need to mention that I have no forgiveness for the parents and extended family involved with the coverup of the truth at my expense?
G: Cover up! good God! cover up of the truth, what truth, she was adopted, she suffered because they didn’t tell her the truth! How many people are on the earth? Each of them have been lied to at some point. Get over it Joan. Forgiveness, she hasn’t a clue what that means. Do people who read her really want her help in their adoption problems? I’d run away as fast as I could. This is how she addresses her elders, by not extending a basic thank you for the very fact that they took care of her. How humane is that? She also hates the extended family. Looks to me like Joan hates the entire Wheeler family for the imagine sin of adopting her. She also hates the entire birth family for their involvement in the ‘cover up’. Hey, everybody did it on purpose, to piss Joan off!
Ruth: Right – I was only 3 years old when Joan was adopted, but I guess I had a hand in the coverup. As to the extended family – her birth cousin Gail who is the same age as Joan, bumped into Joan at an amusement park when the girls were both 10 years old. Gail was confused, because Joan looked like me. Her mother (who knew who Joan was) told Gail that Joan was indeed my sister, but not to tell me. Oh yes, Joan, blame a 10 YEAR OLD CHILD FOR THE COVERUP! Oh my god this is worse than Watergate!
J: I am not required to give forgiveness as it was not earned, nor even asked for, except by my adoptive father immediately after he spoke with my natural father on the phone in 1974 just days after I was found.
G: Since when is forgiveness a requirement or something that is earned? The greatest gift a person can give themselves is forgiveness. This is a core problem in Joan’s character and soul. She doesn’t understand about forgiveness and letting go. She is so full of hate and anger for being adopted she can’t forgive herself. She is self-righteous in her crusade to rid the world of the injustice of closed adoption.
Ruth: And I will not forgive a low-life scumbag who tried to railroad me into jail, tried to break me and my fiance up, tried to get me fired from my job over false accusations, wrote stupid letters to the mayor of Buffalo, and keeps saying that I have a criminal record – which is false. Yeah, that be Joan I’m talking about!
J: For whose happiness did I enter their family? Theirs. I was manipulated and tricked into believing the life they fed me. I developed close attachments and love with aunts, uncles and cousins who later turned out to hate me (but other cousins and aunts and uncles were not that way). I loved my adoptive parents, but I was cheated out of life with the siblings I was never supposed to know. Meanwhile, my natural father lost his newborn daughter and his other children lost their baby sister.
G: Good God! She can’t even take ownership of her own life! Instead of being alive and happy she sees her life as one of a total victim who was manipulated and tricked. Is she the only person who ever felt their childhood was not perfect. Oh I forgot, she was adopted and so that means there were lies and coverups, oh the injustice of it all! Lying to the adopted child is manipulation and trickery!
Ruth: yeah, we lost our baby sister – she should have stayed lost. If only we had a crystal ball in 1974, we would never have gone looking for her. Reason: read my last comment. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of the stuff she has done to us!
G: Here she is talking about the adoptive family, who hated her, why then does she hate the birth family? Oh I forgot, she was lied to and tricked by us too. She was cheated out of her siblings. That comes with the territory of being adopted, one family gives the child to another family. A child can not be raised with two sets of parents and siblings. While it is a tragic thing that occurred, death of our mother and our father having to place the infant (Joan) for adoption, it was NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. It could have had a much more healthy outcome if Joan wasn’t so warped in the brain!
J: Let this be a lesson to adoptive parents everywhere: be as honest as you possibly can with your adoptee.
G: You hear that adoptive parents? It is you that are the dangerous ones! And if you are not truthful and honest, your kids will turn out just like Joan! And if you adopt a child, like I did, you will have Joan come after you, in a heart beat, to condemn you!
J: Honesty is the best policy. For when there are secrets and spiteful rage to keep the adoptee from ever knowing the truth, the adoptee suffers at the hands of the very people who are suppose to love that adoptee unconditionally. Withholding vital information and preventing a minor child contact with full or half siblings is a cruelty worthy to be called child abuse of both the adoptee and her siblings left behind.
G: In the course of human development and discourse, humans dealing with other humans, there is NO SUCH THING AS UNCONDITIONAL LOVE. That is a fantasy. You, Joan want the truth? You, Joan can’t handle the truth! No human being can love another human unconditionally by the very nature of being human. If you want unconditional love, go to God!
Ruth: Honesty is the best policy? I can’t believe that these words are coming from Joan, considering how much she lies about me and just about everybody in her book.
G: Joan is such an expert she nows declares closed adoption to be a cruelty by the name of child abuse! Oh she ought to NOT tread on that business! Keep watching this blog for I shall tell all about Joan’s own dirty deeds regarding child abuse actions against my children! Shame Shame Shame, Joan.
J: Yes, today my elderly adoptive mother shares her joyous memories with me of the day she and my father “got” me. She talks of the baby shower that welcomed me into the family. I acknowledge her joys. This is her journey through life. I try to make her as comfortable as possible by listening to her.
G: Oh how touching! Too bad it isn’t for real! Unless of course a person, like Joan, has two personalities where in one post, this one we are reading here, she tells how she can’t and won’t forgive the adoptive mother and then turns around here and shares the same mother’s feelings and is made comfortable by Joan. Is there a bucket I can vomit in??!!
Ruth: oh did Joan forget about that cruel lie that her adoptive mother told her about when they first brought Joan home from the court? – Supposedly, when they opened up the swaddlings, they found the baby covered in body sores, that were caused by the poor hygeinic practices of my dead mother’s brother, Richard and his wife Ann. And Joan puts that lie in her book! I spoke to Rich and he said that when Joan was discharged from Millard Fillmore Gates Hospital, Joan had IMPETIGO, a contagious pimply rash and during the three months Joan lived with them, Ann tried her hardest to clear it up. Ann and Richard were eventually divorced, but Richard defended his ex-wife! So much for honesty coming from Joan.
J: I also acknowledge my profound sadness at what I lost: my entire family of birth. My father, my siblings, my aunts, uncles and cousins, and I lost my natural mother due to her early death, a death that lead to my father’s mistaken belief that the only course of action was to give me up to a completely closed adoption. We lived less than six miles apart, but this magical social construct of adoption robbed me of my family, robbed my siblings of their baby sister, and robbed my father of his daughter.
G: She forgets that she HAD the entire birth family when she was 18 but she blew it! Our father did not have any mistaken belief on the course of action regarding placing her in adoption. It is only in Joan’s diseased mind that this happened. Living six miles apart is worthless information. Facts were there was no adult to care for 5 young children. Get a grip on reality! And if anyone thinks that those that make the laws, that adoption reform people want to change, if you think that Joan is a good activist, think again. Who would take her serious? Just listen to her. Would you?
J: The only ones who got away with any happiness and security were my adoptive parents. They got the baby they could not produce on their own. Eighteen years of infertility and voila – a baby is suddenly available by the death of her mother. Take the baby and run. Have a baby shower and pamper that baby girl with all their love. And for what? For 18 years of lies to the adoptee and 36 years of hell to pay after I was found by the very siblings my adoptive mother so adamantly declared I should never know.
G: Here’s that dual personality again and gee it was only 3 paragraphs ago, go ahead and count them back, where Joan, speaking about the adoptive mother said she “try to make her as comfortable as possible by listening to her”. Flip-flap, flip-flap, love-hate, love-hate, sick sick sick And mockery again! Why did Joan post this on the blog? What purpose does it have for reform? Was it just another opportunity to tell the world how horrible a life she has? That’s right, Love! Joan can’t accept love, she spits on it. Hell is self made! Joan is still in her self made jail cell.
J: The past 36 years have been filed with accusations that I have been disloyal and ungrateful. Why? For accepting the truth of my birth and adoption? Why is it always the adoptee who is expected to accept other people’s viewpoints and opinions? Is it worth it to be permanently separated by arbitrary laws and social constructs to create a falsehood within which the adoptee is expected to live? No, it is not.
G: She has to ask why! Her words speak volumes. No one can have any kind of intelligent conversation with Joan because she has already made up her mind, she is right, the rest of the world is wrong. And, don’t cross her or you will find herself on her shit list.
J: I have been told with flippant comments from non-adoptees that “that’s the way it was done back then”. So? That doesn’t make it right. I am the one to suffer the consequences of other people’s actions. My life as an adoptee was not worth the cocoon-sheltered childhood and the emotional and psychological abusive adult life I have had to endure because of adoption.
G: Perhaps it doesn’t make it right, whoever said that life was fair? Life is full of injustices, the key is to LEARN from them, not wallow in it. Yes, Joan it was your lot in life to suffer the consequences! There must be a REASON why her life went the way it did, for you to learn a lesson. You better learn soon, because you don’t have forever on this planet. As an adult you had the power of change, you could have changed your life at any moment, but you choose to stay a victim.
J: Now I must slowly say goodbye to a misguided elderly adoptive mother, make her journey to life’s passing as gentle as possible, and struggle to comprehend the devastation left behind.
G: Seems as if she is still laying it on thick! Here is Joan, abused adoptee, having still to care for an aged and misguided adoptive mother. She’s laying the guilt on to that dying woman while she thinks she is telling the world that she is doing a wonderful thing. Joan is helping the very woman she hates! That must really piss Joan off! Joan is still struggling, always will, to figure out anything. What devastation is left behind? Obviously very soon she won’t have the other half of this sick relationship.
So there we have it, more of the same. Yawn, yawn, big, big, yawn!
So if you are looking for some serious materials for adoption reform, Joan Wheeler is not the place to go!
A Lesson in Life: Duplicitous People are All Around You – Trust Your Instincts. and – Joan Wheeler jumps at the chance to try to stick it to me the beginning of June 2010. July 23, 2010Posted by Ruth in Lessons in Life, mental illness.
Tags: back stabbers, back stabbing, being downright nasty, Disrespect, duplicitous people, immaturity, mental illness, stupidity, two-faced people
additional information about Little Laura – the two faced (duplicitous) cow-worker who decided to fuck with me, despite me doing absolutely nothing to her. This is all new – from July 16, 2013 – where Laura J. Stickney-Heath’s husband Thomas D. Heath began officially “following” me on facebook. I have never met Tom in person, WHY would a complete stranger follow me on facebook? In this old post, I did not use Laura’s last name, but now I will. This was all in the past, over and done with. It was LAURA J. STICKNEY-HEATH who started shit with me again – and I haven’t laid eyes on her for three years! So now, since LAURA J. STICKNEY-HEATH decided to insert herself into MY business, she (and her husband) are now forever named and part of this blog. You don’t want to be part of this Laura? You should have thought of that before you consciously involved yourself and your husband in my life.
Here are the posts outlining the recent unwanted involvement in my life by Laura and her husband Tom. They began stalking me, and now they pay the penalty by being immortalized on this blog.
An acquantaince of mine, Little Laura (I call her this because although she is 45, she acted like a little girl) proved my gut instinct about her correct. When I first met her, I got some strange vibes, but I shook them off, wanting to give her a chance. We got along fine – until last December, when she started changing. Just little things, like beginning to boss me around, being petty, and making some snide remarks. For example, I have had pierced ears for years, but in recent years, let the holes in my ears close up. I could only locate one of the pair of the piercers I had from 1983, so I used it to reopen one of the holes in my left ear. And it has stay in for a week. So when another person saw this, she was ribbing me that I was wearing one earring, and that was ghetto. Her ribbing was good-natured. So I told her well, I can’t find the mate to it, and Little Laura, says (snottily) “They’re only 2.99 at Sally Beauty Supply.” First of all, who asked her? Second, I am a grown woman. Third, I only wanted to wear one because it hurt. I didn’t want more than one hole hurting, and I have four holes total. At the time, I was also battling bronchitis, and was trying to keep my discomfort down. Fourth, I don’t have to justify myself or my actions to ANYone, not even on this blog – but I am relating this tale about Little Laura.
So when she said this, I felt uncomfortable. Now Little Laura was one of my Facebook friends. And a couple of times she would vent on Facebook when she had a bad night at work, and further, one time going so far as to say “I’m tired of working with lazy ass bitches.” That is crossing the line baby. Facebook is very public, and you just don’t know who is seeing what you write.
Me, on the other hand, when I have vented, I keep it to generalities – “Oh what a night I had at work! I’m so glad I’m home.” Well, twice in the course of a couple of months when I did this, Little Laura comes on Facebook and upbraids me, minimizing my feelings. I got those uneasy feelings again. “Friends” don’t do this. I began to distance myself from Little Laura.
So one night in May 2010, I had a particularly bad night at work. One patient even took a swing at me, trying to assault me. Between me and one of the nurses, we changed the pissy bed of one man 8 times. And he kept climbing out of bed. There was a lot of stuff going on. Also, I noticed that one of my cow-workers (not a typo) had developed the petty habit of not taking all the bloods down to the lab. Let me explain. When we PCAs (Patient Care Associate) draw a patient’s blood, we put the vials of blood into a basket at the front desk.Someone must then take them down two floors to the Central Lab. This cow-worker was taking down ONLY the bloods that SHE obtained, leaving mine behind. um, where’s the teamwork there? So this one particularly bad night, she did it again. And when I got home from work, I was winding down and on my Facebook page, I vented, saying something like “what a night I had, blah, blah, blah”
Well Little Laura did it again, leaving me a message that left me stunned. I had a very bad night, my back was hurting (I have scoliosis (curvature of the spine and arthritis in my spine, but I still work dam hard and do heavy lifting). What she said was not important, but again, she minimized MY dam feelings, and again, a “friend” doesn’t do this. But Little Laura proved she was no friend, so on May 24, 2010, I removed her from my Facebook friends list.
So what does Little Laura do? She gets insulted. And sends me a message asking “What is your problem?” – I don’t have to justify myself to her or anyone, so I did not answer her – and I blocked her. When you block someone on Facebook, they can’t see anything you write, and you can’t see anything they write. So since May 24, I have not any contact with Little Laura. On Memorial Day, I became very sick and was out of work for 2 weeks, and even up to today, I have been sick on and off since the beginning of June.
Now remember what I said about how the blocking works on Facebook – when I first joined Facebook a year ago, I noticed that Joan Wheeler had a Facebook page, and apparently when she found out that I was on Facebook, she blocked me, so we could not see anything that each other writes. And that suits me to a “T.”
The other day, a friend of mine called me up. He had some information for me. I had confided him about Little Laura, and told him her last name. He was on Facebook and on Joan Wheeler’s Facebook page, someone with the same name as Little Laura popped up as one of her friends. I went over to his house – sure enough – Little Laura was now Facebook friends with Joan Wheeler. Going back we found out that this “friendship” began on June 5, 2010 – just a week and a half after I booted Little Laura off my Facebook.
How mature! Basically what Little Laura did was this: “sniff, you don’t want to be my facebook friend. I’ll show you- I’ll go to JMW and we will gossip about you. sniff. I’ll show you. sniff. sniff.”
Which confirms my evaluation of her character – that she is duplicitous – meaning – two-faced.
So how do you think this played out? I don’t know when Little Laura sent the friend invite to Joan, but she must have sent her a nice message introducing herself to Joan. I wonder what she wrote. Must have been some juicy gossip for Joan to jump at the chance to be Facebook friends with someone that I just booted off my page.
So we see what a little snot Little Laura is. And what does this tale show us about Joan Wheeler’s character? That someone who got pissed off at me, goes running like a little girl to my enemy, and Joan the enemy, is just sooo happy to have as one of her friends, someone who is mad at me. That’s a good basis for a wonderful friendship!
These two losers are both over 21, they can be Facebook buddies. I don’t have the right to deny them this. I just find it interesting how duplicitous people can be. And what USERS they can be.
Joan: do you REALLY think Little Laura is going to become your best friend? She is a snake. She went from being my friend, running over to you. You are just a tool for her to get back at me for daring to chose not to be associated with her. If she could turn on me, her “friend,” she will turn on you.
Little Laura: do you REALLY think Joan is going to become YOUR best friend? She is a snake. You are just a tool for her to gather information on me to try to use against me. Back in 1994 Joan tried to get me fired from my job. Over nonsense. She filed a false complaint saying that I hacked into my employer’s computers. They investigated, and found me innocent. But Joan would not accept this. She called repeatedly for several more months. Little Laura, Joan has a history of filing false police reports against people. Not just me, but others. This is the person YOU want as a friend? Joan is only out to USE you. She didn’t know about you, but when you contacted her via Facebook, she jumped at the chance to be your friend – because you can provide her with ammunition against me.
These two USERS and LOSERS deserve each other. And I am not worried one little bit about these two idiots. Because even though Little Laura and Joan may think they have ammunition against me, they don’t. Little Laura’s reputation precedes her. People know about how she is. And I don’t have tell anybody anything. In fact, for several months, people have been telling me about HER. And people are onto Joan’s little games. My employer already knows that Joan M. Wheeler is a liar and a crackpot.
Bottom line: I think they are both screwed in the head. And pretty damned stupid.
What is a Birth Certificate Used For? Thoughts on Chapter 13 of Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler July 22, 2010Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, bigotry, birth certificates, contradictions, contributing the deliquency of a minor, falsified birth certificates, faulty memory, Lies, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths
by Gert McQueen
Guess who’s NOT coming to dinner? And is it affection or an invitation?
‘If love be not in the house, there is nothing’…Ezra Pound
See updated info at end of this post
Do you really need a document to prove your inner self? For what is a document but a piece of paper that states certain facts, vital information if you like, the who, what, where, when and why…why, because you exist therefore you MUST have documentation! Chapter 13, Adoption and Birth facts switched on documents.
The basic question is, just what is a birth certificate used for, what is it’s primary purpose? Quite frankly for identification purposes and it is the business of Vital Records and Vital Statistics to make the rules governing such documents…not Joan. Everywhere you go, for anything you want to do in the world, you must have ID, and a birth certificate does that basic job. If you are adopted well information must be ‘switched’, that is simply the way the law works that’s the way it is and golly gee perhaps Joan ought just accept it.
Pg 117 Joan shows again her propensity for being smarter and wiser than any form of officialdom. She was in ‘disbelief’ and ‘livid’ ‘that New York State Officials actually typed in’…. those dumb officials don’t they know that they can’t do that!
Joan’s describing the adoption papers is loaded with a sick sort of drama; twisted minds make twisted lives and twisted tales. It’s really hard to read. She uses a form of second-guessing in this drama; ‘was she (adoptive mom) possessive and hostile because she wanted to believe she gave birth to me?’ and the adoptive father ‘he wasn’t my father because he created me in the old fashioned way…but because the Surrogate Court…declared him so by legal adoption.’ By ‘the old fashioned way’ she must mean by the usual sexual means of producing children. Why does she beat around the bush here why not just get to the point, she usually doesn’t have a problem spelling things out, so why not here? Is it because she hadn’t explored the ‘old-fashioned way’ yet? (Ruth’s note – no Gert, she had been exploring the “old-fashioned way” since she was 16).
She maintains that the records are ‘falsification of the truth’…no it’s the legal means of adapting to a new reality i.e. from birth to one set of parents to adoption by another set of parents, no falsification at all. But Joan, who is a upstanding moral person! feels that ‘there is something morally wrong in the way the truth had been altered, and hidden…couldn’t understand why birth records were legally altered when I (she) knew that falsifying documents are illegal.’ Oh dear me! Does that mean that the department of vital records did something illegal? Joan is always tying her self up into knots over things that are just legal fictions to prove the change of name from this to that. But to her, it is always ‘a slipup…must have made a mistake…’ The reason the adoptee doesn’t see the pre-adoption birth certificate is because it is up to the adults that are making the adoption of the adoptee to inform that child when appropriate. She’s always making something out of nothing and she is off fighting bureaucratic and her families.
Pg 120 Joan tells us that she is ‘hungry for identification with people like (her)’, she starts to make contacts, with other adoptees, but ‘their words stirred up feelings of isolation, anger and resentment’…she ‘wanted to enjoy life’ but she now ‘had THIS to deal with – THIS being … adoption and reunion’. (the capital letters are hers) Drama! So her dramas lead her more into loneliness and sadness and looking in all the wrong places for love as she explored the ‘old-fashioned way’ in ‘a few one-night stands’, and then she starts to date a 18-year-old Black guy that lasts ‘for two years’.
Reality check! The times were the mid-1970s, Joan was a very immature sheltered girl who had no experience living with the racial tensions and riots that swept across the country. I, like many others, did. Interracial couplings were NOT the norm, they were scandalous and NOT for every family. The movie Guess who’s coming to dinner appeared in 1967, most families in America were NOT like the family portrayed in the movie. In real life the late 60’s and early 70’s were filled with much violence as the Civil Rights movement was stabilizing. Many whites might have been okay with mix-race couplings but many were not and the same can be said for the Blacks, if they did they were a minority keeping a low profile, something Joan knows nothing about. In many families the idea of crossing racial lines was just not done and the issue was entirely up to an individual family as to how they reached those decisions. When a child goes against the established core values of their family and the wishes of the parents, for shock value, for acting out, for rebellion, the situation never works out well.
This is what Joan did, she did it for rebellion reasons and she gives ‘lip service’ to it when she says ‘…years later that perhaps I used racial issues as a smoke screen – something to focus on instead of what was really bothering me.’ Again, too bad for me that she didn’t come to that conclusion sooner before she interfered with my parental authority and told my 13 years daughter that ‘your mother doesn’t know anything, don’t listen to her, if you want to date a Black boy do it’! But that’s a story for a later. She says that the interracial relationship and adoption issues ‘drove a wedge between her parents and herself…they fought bitterly.’ That is her adoptive parents.
As I stated in a previous post, as very young children, my parents and us 4 children, lived in the same house with a Black family and we were raised not as racists or bigots. My father, in particular, always allowed us to make our own decisions and if we were happy he was happy. My sister Ruth has had long-term relationships with other races and they were and are accepted within our family. My personal views were that it was not right for myself, or my children, even though they, my children, were free to have friends of different races and religions. As a parent I have the right to make the ‘established core values of the family’ and no one has the right to contradict them to my minor children, as Joan did.
On pg 122 Joan tells of a phone conversation with me, ‘the eldest…which made her an authority figure’, in which I tell her that ‘it’s your choice and you alone will have to live with the consequences, but you are young and don’t know what you’re doing…you can’t dislocate yourself from your family…society isn’t ready for it and you have to live with the rules of society’. That’s correct, I said it or something like it and it was sound advice, then and now. But to Joan, she ‘…hung up the phone in disbelief…Gert must have been chosen to be the spokesperson to represent the entire Sippel, Herr and Wheeler family clans.’ Not true! I was stating my own personal opinion and speaking as a parent myself. It is only Joan who feels the need to find someone to point the finger at to say that they are the cause of her problems. So Be It!
So she gets back to having more dramas. ‘There was a Reunion in Progress but no one knew how to proceed.’ Did she? no she just lets more of her inner life talk to her and she comes up with ‘my families hated blacks, therefore, they hated me. I was a sinner in need of repentance….’ and on and on and on. She ‘was getting caught up in the world’s social causes, she didn’t see what these causes were doing to her.’ Personal note: Joan never gave anyone the opportunities to continue with the ‘in progress’ because she was so argumentive and aggressive in her positions and would not allow others, particularly the adoptive and birth families, to have their own opinions and views on any social issue, it was always about Joan.
Pg 123 ‘then I suffered gastrointestinal problems, sinus infections and backaches.’
Pg 126 adoptive ‘mom was admitted to the hospital with stomach ulcers.’
Pg 129 adoptive ‘father was admitted to the hospital with another bleeding ulcer.’
What does that tell you?
Also, while deciding whether to go to Egypt for a year she ‘was terrified of the Arab society in which women weren’t held equal to men…(was advised) to be aware that an outspoken woman in an Arab country would be a target for ridicule, assault and rape…I wasn’t sure it would be worth it…’ If she couldn’t take the pressure of family responses to her dating a Black man, in this country, what planet was she on when thinking she would be safe on Arab turf in the first place?
On Pg 124 Joan finally tells us the real reason she wrote this book! She makes contact with someone at ALMA who wanted to have her story in his up coming book A Time to Search. ‘The idea of being in a book excited me’ but was told later that he ‘can’t use your story after all…your reunion took place outside the realm of ALMA and its registry’. So Joan says, ‘the nerve of him…my story wasn’t good enough because I didn’t have a reunion with ALMA, I’ll show him, I’ll write my own book, my story was unique enough to stand on its own, that’s how the seed was planted in March 1976, two years into my reunion.’ So much for altruistic reasons!
Then there’s more drama with adoption issues and interactions with birth family members that she can’t figure out how to take and makes things up according to her own views. Pg 128. In 76, during a visit with our brother he tells her that he is moving west; now she is ‘losing him’. My brother drives her home one night and in the driveway ‘…he leaned over and kissed my cheek. I was stunned. I didn’t grow up with sisters and brothers….I didn’t know how it felt to be kissed by my brother…it felt odd.’
Then she tells of a visit with me in which she states ‘…that after the kids were in bed…we drank…wine…she (that’s me) rolled a few joints.’ Here we go again, tell the world that I smoked a few joints. I wished! But she continues on with the story ‘…we talked about…then the discussion turned intense. She sat close to me on the couch. She made advances that I interpreted as sexual. I was confused, drugged and drunk. I missed Momma, as she did, she told me not to tell anyone.’
Jesus Christ Almighty! So here it is folks, I, big sister, confused her, drugged her, got her drunk and then made sexual advances to her, and mind you, I told her not to tell anyone! Never happened! First she admits that she was ‘stunned’ when her brother kissed her on the cheek, ‘it felt odd’. True she did not grow up with other siblings so she hasn’t a clue about affection between siblings. She can’t figure out that we siblings also had feelings of joy and affection for her and that sometimes a hug is just a hug, a kiss is just a kiss! Everything that happens to Joan happens from the Joan filter!
At this particular time frame, summer of 76, I was going through some pretty intense stuff in my life and Joan was not part of it! My fiancé, not my boy friend, and I were to be married that year, he was to adopt, oh dear me, adopt, my children and we were to have more children. But he got cancer and this particular summer he was sick, sick and sick. In addition, my ex-husband at the time was badgering me weekly to ‘hurry up, get married, and adopt those kids, so I don’t have to pay the child support’. My world had started to crumble that summer. My fiancé died in November. I was numb for almost a year, just doing my job so I could support my children and going through the motions. Joan meant nothing to me! And she was getting ready to go to Liverpool, England and she gave little thought to my troubles and me.
But, Joan is good, in a sleazily way, I have to give her credit; she is laying the groundwork here for some event that comes later on, or else she has taken ‘liberties’ and combined one event onto another, either way, what she has said is not a true representation. But oh, what a storyteller she is, too bad most of it can’t be relied upon. I cannot of course comment about events and stories she tells about my other siblings and other family members. If I wasn’t there, at any event, gathering etc, I cannot comment, that being said, I truly have to wonder about the authenticity of other ‘events’ and hope that my sisters make their own observations known here.
Pg 128 she relates ‘…my college roommate, Lucy…we spent some time with…(Ruth) and her…boyfriend and his brother…we went dancing…’ Wrong, lie! According to Ruth, it was not Lucy it was the black boyfriend and at a bowling alley they got into an argument and he threatened her. He had already beaten her up; she was terrified. When they got home, Joan slept on the couch and the boyfriend stayed in the car, for Ruth didn’t want any problems with her neighbors.
Pg 129 Joan relates that ‘…my adoptive mother and I threw a going-away party for B and M (brother and his wife).’ According to Ruth, this is a lie, she herself has answered this issue, but for the record here and now, the party was at our father’s in Sept and Ruth has pictures! There is some doubt as to whether Joan herself was there but certainly her mother was not. Joan’s adoptive mother NEVER was at our father’s home. Ruth was never at Joan’s adoptive home. (Ruth’s note: I was at the house perhaps 3 or 4 times). I was only at that home a couple of times and we have no real knowledge about whether or not our brother ever was at that home. Kathy was already in England and never was in that home. We have no real knowledge about the so-called visits that Joan retells that occurred at our father’s home with our stepmother and other siblings.
I have been quite suspicious, as I read, of all these ‘visits’ between natural father and adopted parents that she relates; they seemed so out of character of everyone in light of how Joan relentlessly portrays the emotional instability of her adopted mother. So what does this prove? That Joan’s ‘recollections’ are flawed, at best a combination of several different events put together to make a whole that ‘fits in’ with Joan’s sense of reality. Her recollections are not to be trusted!
UPDATE Dec 2015; as older posts are being seen I’m updating with links to my second blog and a Facebook page wherein I expose AGAIN the lies, fabrications and hate that Joan M Wheeler says about me and family. After the first book was pulled from publication by the publisher, May 2011, she has ‘self-published’ another ‘revised’ version.
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, embellishing the truth, emotional abuse, false accusations, harassment of an adoptee's birth family, Lies, spreading untruths
From: Gert McQueen
To Trafford Publishing June 22, 2010
I have the book, that your company published, called Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler. I am writing to complain about the physical breakdown of the book. I have had the book since February 2010 and in the past 5 months the book is physically falling apart. I am using the book as a reference guide for what it was described for. I do research, which requires frequently handling of the book. The cover of the book has a black film coating; it is coming loose from the edges and developing holes along the spine. The pages are beginning to come apart at the seams. For a book to fall apart in only 5 months is unacceptable. Gert McQueen
—– Forwarded Message —-
From: Trafford Customer Support <CustomerSupport@trafford.com>
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 1:17:23 PM
Subject: RE: Trafford Contact Us Form
Thanks for the email.
I apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused you. Rest assured that we will look into this matter with our printers. As far as I know, all our printed copies are tested and approved by our quality assurance team before being shipped out to buyers.
Should you need further assistance, please contact email@example.com and any member of the team will be happy to help.
Mitch de Silva
Customer Support Team
1663 Liberty Drive
Bloomington, IN 47403
phone: 1-888-232-4444 ext. 3
Office Hours: Mon-Fri 8am-5pm Eastern
Please include your Project ID number and title in your email subject line.
complaint to Trafford publishing: I am writing to complain about the physical breakdown of the book. I have had the book since February 2010 and in the past 5 months the book is physically falling apart. I am using the book as a reference guide for what it was described for. I do research, which requires frequently handling of the book. The cover of the book has a black film coating; it is coming loose from the edges and developing holes along the spine. The pages are beginning to come apart at the seams. For a book to fall apart in only 5 months is unacceptable. – Gert McQueen
From Ruth Pace – 3 other family members purchased the book (one purchased it for Gert) in December 2009 and have the same complaints of its physical condition. I have this to say about its content: it is NOT a book of non-fiction, or a “scholarly” work on adoption reform – the author goes out of her way to trash everyone in her life who has ever made her angry. I am her birth sister, referred to as Brenda in the book. Gross lies about me and my character are all over this book, including slanderous things – like I have been arrested and have a criminal record. This is patently false! Other family members have also been trashed. Speaking of trash – this is exactly where this book belongs. I gave it a star rating, as per the website, but it really gets a 5 razz review.
tags: adoption books, revenge writing
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, contradictions, dishonesty, embellishing the truth, Lies, misrepresenting one's credentials, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths
By Gert McQueen, July 12, 2010
Joan Wheeler states, in many venues where she is promoting herself and her book, Forbidden Family, that she has been in the adoption reform movement since 1974. This is not fully correct, it is another one of Joan’s attempts to play with facts and hijack the truth, betting that people don’t question her facts.
During the years of 1974-78, she was in college and learning and dealing with her ‘reunion’. She was a very young, naive girl with a lot of anger and hate, searching for some kind of meaning to her life. That is hardly being ‘active in the adoption reform movement’. Yes she wrote editorials and articles to a newspaper, but again, that is not considered proper involvement, it was more or less her avenue to ‘vent’ her anger and frustations.
According to Joan’s own words, in her own book, Forbidden Family this is what she says:
pg 102, 1974, she took a college course called Family Dynamics, did a research paper and a family tree. These activities do not constitute involvement with any reform movement, all it shows is her personal interest in a particular topic.
pg 113, Joan made friends with a professor and his wife who had adopted children and they had a group called, Council on Adoptable Children. Joan gets a book called Search for Anna Fischer. Joan asked me, her birth sister, to sent her newspaper articles on adoption. These activities do not constitute involvement with any reform movement, all it shows is her personal interest in a particular topic.
pg 114/115 around Dec 1974 Joan wrote a letter to ALMA, and on pg 115 she wrote ‘I had no idea that I’d be involved from that moment on…’ THIS IS THE IMPORTANT POINT. She WAS NOT involved in the movement in 1974 because she only WROTE THE LETTER in December 1974.
pg 120 Joan finally receives newsletters from ALMA in Feb 1975, NOT 1974 and again, these activities do not constitute involvement with any reform movement, all it shows is her personal interest in a particular topic.
pg 124 Feb 1976 Joan goes to NY City for her first ALMA meeting, during which she learns that she might be able to be in a book about adoptees, but she did not meet their qualifications. That is the reason she decided to write the book Forbidden Family. It is only at this time, Feb 1976, would I believe that she ‘belonged’ to an organization for adoption reform. BUT, by her own words on pg 124, they didn’t want her and she began her own quest for recognition.
So was she or was she not a member of ALMA in 1976 when she went to her first meeting? 1976 is not 1974.
pg 125 Joan started a Chapter of ALMA in Erie PA, spring of 1976 but it was disbanned. This is another false attempt to get involved with the movement, remember she was in college and that to deal with, not a reform movement. 1976 is not 1974.
So when did Joan Wheeler really start in the Adoption Reform Movement? By her own words, not when she states she did.
well said Gert.
Readers, do you see how fast and loose Joan plays with the “facts.”And the TRUTH!
If you want the facts, and the TRUTH about Joan Wheeler, never fear, The Three Sippel Sisters will not let you down!
If you want the facts, and the TRUTH about our family, we are here to tell it.
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, contradictions, dishonesty, embellishing the truth, Lies, mental instability, misrepresenting one's credentials, misrepresenting one's employment, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths
by Gert McQueen June 22, 2010
Joan Wheeler’s book “Forbidden Family,” deliberately falsifiies the facts of her birth, life, adoption, reunion, problems within and without her adoption and reunion, her activities within the reform movement, her career or lack of in Social Work and her own mental instabilities.
Joan’s so called advocacy for adoption reform ought to be based on facts, if it is to be of benefit for true reform. As such her book and it’s contents falls under the scientific parameters of getting at the truth. Any one who is serious about adoption reform would want to have true facts at hand to accomplish that goal.
Unfortunately Joan is in love with her own theories. She can not give them up even in the face of overwhelming evidence that her theories are wrong. This blog’s purpose is to prove that her theories are wrong by giving that overwhelming evidence.
The following may be a somewhat unorthodox reference, but it says it quite well, in my opinion. I was watching a DVD last night called Dorothy Sayrers Mysteries Gaudy Night 1987 BBC.
A crime detective in the story said: ‘The only principal that has made science possible is the ethical one, that, the truth must be told at all times and if we do not penalize false statements made in error than we open up the way for false statements made by intent and the falsification of fact made by intent is the most serious crime a scientist may commit.’
This is what Joan has done, she has made … ‘false statements made by intent and the falsification of fact made by intent is the most serious crime a scientist may commit’ and it is our intent, on this blog site, to bring out her falsifications of the facts publicly.
Who knows better about the truth of my own life? Me, who lives it, or the pathological liar Joan Wheeler? July 8, 2010Posted by Ruth in Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: adoption reform, blaming people for your own mess, contradictions, cowardice, dishonesty, false accusations, faulty memory, Lies, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths, stupidity
Joan Wheeler is so upset that I started this blog. I started this blog because in November 2009, I read a statement of hers on the internet that involved me. And it was NOT the truth. So I rebutted her statement. The owner of the website would not publish my comment. Because it was one of those anti-adoption forums and the web-host was a “friend” of Joan’s. So much for the militant adult adoptee reformers who keep claiming they want the “truth.” They only want THEIR truth published, not anybody else’s, and certainly not someone who is presenting an opposing opinion of one of their militant members. They don’t publish the real TRUTH, they only publish their twisted versions of their interpretation of the TRUTH.
I certainly know the TRUTH of my life. I know the FACTS. I know I didn’t get my driver’s license until 1976. I well remember what apartment I was living in – the back upstairs apartment of 293 Amherst St. I well remember meeting my first husband Abdo in May of 1975, and I was still living in an apartment at the corner of Elmwood and Allen. I walked to work, and used my BICYCLE to go places. I well remember using my bike to go to Abdo’s house on Grant St. And when Abdo and I moved in together in July of 1975 on Amherst St., I then took the Grant St. Number 3 BUS to work everynight. I left my house at 10:00 to get the bus. During the winter of 75-76, we got stranded downtown and nearly froze waiting for a bus home. That’s when we made the decision to get a car. We bought it in March 1976. Even though neither one of us could drive. So how does Joan account for her saying in her book Forbidden Family that I drove her around in 1974? This is her truth? Nope, this is a falsehood. Or a faulty memory working here. So how do YOU people who bought her book know what she is saying is the REAL truth? She can’t even remember correctly the so-called “facts” she presents in her book. Can you trust somebody like this? I sure can’t. And I won’t.
So this is why I have this blog – to get out the TRUTH and the FACTS of my own life – something I know a hell of a lot better than Joan. Because she hasn’t lived my life – she doesn’t know my life – all she knows is how to lie.
Like telling people that I have a criminal record. Where is your proof Joan? I have proof that I do not have a criminal record. Joan also says that she has had multiple orders of protection against me – and I have submitted scanned court documents right here on this blog that proves that she did not. She relates a fantasy court battle in the year 1994, and an incident that occured at the water fountain when the court broke for lunch. I have submitted on this blog, court documents from 1999 that show we never were in court in 1994, it was in 1995, and it was not HER that institued the court case, it was ME. And I submitted my summons to appear at 2 in the afternoon, which is AFTER lunch.
Joan then reads my blog and complains that I am harassing her because I dare tell the TRUTH of what happened between us. And other TRUTHS. She keeps saying that I am harassing her, interfering with her, doing things to her.
It isn’t a matter of “doing” something to her. It is a matter of the TRUTH coming out. It will be the TRUTH that will do something to her. It is Joan’s own LIES being uncovered that is “doing” something to her.
People sometimes wonder why I can’t bury the past. You cannot bury the past when the LIE affects the present.
Therefore, I and my sisters will continue to write our TRUTH here, and if Joan doesn’t like it, or can’t take it, well, so be it.
There will be a posting in a few days from another Sippel Sister – Gert McQueen – stayed tuned for some more TRUTH-telling.