Joan Wheeler LIES about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen in her book Forbidden Family September 20, 2010Posted by Ruth in Lies in the book Forbidden Family.
Tags: adoption, adoption reform, Disrespect, Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, embellishing the truth, Lies, Mr. Joe Soll, stupidity, theft
Joan M Wheeler has published a new ‘revision’ of the same old hate manifesto and renamed it ‘Duped by Adoption’. I have created a new blog and Facebook page…
Here are the links to my NEW blog and Facebook page
On Amazon, I have reviewed 7 reviews of this ‘new’ garbage book and created a ‘discussion’ on the Forward, by Rene Hoksbergen.
Here’s the link to the DISCUSSION about the FORWARD on Amazon
Here’s the link to a recent blog post Nov 3, 2015 about the contents of the forward
Here are the related links to blog posts that Ruth and I have already written and addressed topics related to Rene Hoksbergen, the author of the Forward.
https://ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com/2011/12/27/gert-mcqueens-review-of-rene-hoksbergens-review-of-forbidden-family-by-joan-wheeler/ this one is about the review in LAVAContact2 2010 English translation
NOW to continue on with THIS POST…
This post is about Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, who wrote the forward to Joan Wheeler’s book Fobidden Family. He wrote the forward in 2006, but the book wasn’t published until November 2009, with additions to it that included events that took place in the summer of 2009. I am assuming he READ a manuscript of the book before he wrote the forward. But I guarantee that the manuscript he read is NOT the same that was finally published, for it contains a huge lie – ABOUT HIM!
First – a bit of history – because Dr. Hoksbergen is involved here – when my sister Kathy moved to England in 1974, she left behind two large trunks of belongings, intending to send for them – my brother had possession of them until 1978 when he moved to Arizona. JOAN then took them in, and when she did, she took on the responsibility of caring for them. In 1990-91, Kathy started sending Joan money orders to be used for shipping costs. We have the actual letters that Joan in her handwriting, acknowledges receipt of the money, but SHE NEVER SHIPPED THE BELONGINGS. (therefore, she STOLE the money that Kathy sent her). Finally, Kathy called my father, he yelled at Joan, who’s excuse was that she and her husband only had one car, she had little kids, she didn’t have the time to ship them, blah, blah, blah. My father, WHO DOESN’T EVEN KNOW HOW TO DRIVE – managed to collect Kathy’s belongings, and ship them onto her for a total of about $150.00. (when I first posted about this, I didn’t see the second reciept and put down it was around $52.00). BUT – not all of Kathy’s possessions were there – Joan KEPT some of the stuff – STEALING IT. – oh yes, the letters that Joan and Kathy were writing back and forth here were quite friendly – so much for Joan’s assertions that she has not had contact with Kathy since the late 80’s – another LIE!
Kathy was angry that not all of her possessions were returned, and rightfully so — so what does Joan do? She enlisted the help of Dr. Rene Hoksbergen to send a letter to Kathy, on Utrecht University letterhead stationary telling Kathy that she should feel sorry for Joan, she doesn’t have the money to ship her goods to her – that it was going to cost $500.00 to ship the stuff – (obviously Joan LIED to him about receiving the money from Kathy in the first place).
I will have to scan and post my father’s receipts and the letter from Dr. Hoksbergen – and how dare Joan drag a STRANGER into our family business, and how dare he write to Kathy advising her on how deal with Joan. The result? – a formal complaint was made to Utrecht University in 1993 and a letter of apology from the university was sent to Kathy. Do you see how Joan drags even PROFESSIONAL people into her personal life and cons them into actually interfering with our family’s personal, private lives? This letter will also be posted.
The following are excerpts from previous posts that I have written months ago on this blog, and am reprinting them here:
On page 275, Joan Wheeler recounts a completely fabricated story where she and her husband brought adoption expert from Utrecht, Holland, Dr. Rene Hoksbergen for a visit to my house to meet me and my husband. THIS NEVER HAPPENED! I met Dr. Hoksbergen at Joan’s house on Swinburne St. Buffalo, BUT DR. HOKSBERGEN NEVER CAME TO MY HOUSE AND HE NEVER MET MY HUSBAND, AT OUR HOUSE OR JOAN’S HOUSE.
When I did meet Dr. Hoksbergen, I thought he was a rather nice man. I barely spoke to him, as I am shy around new people.
Joan then recounts a totally ficticious account of Dr. Hoksbergen’s fictitious visit, including a description of me jumping up and down, waving my arms around, yelling at Dr. Hoksbergen and calling Joan names. She says that my husband and I exchanged disgusted looks at each other.
She says that her mentor Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, adoption expert from Utrecht, Holland came to my house to meet me and my husband. LIE! He never came to my house. Joan describes a scene where I jump up and am pumping my arms around calling her obsessed and POSSESSED. This is a lie!
I met Dr. Hoksbergen once, AT JOAN’S HOUSE, AND I BARELY SPOKE TO THE MAN.
Dr. Rene Hoksbergen, I was going to write another post about the time Joan conned YOU into that nonsense about my sister in England’s belongings. I wasn’t going to use your real name, but since you wrote the forward to this book of lies, I hold you partially responsible for this crazy woman’s book of lies.
In your letter to my sister April 19, 1993, you tell K. that the cost of shipping her belongings to her would cost $500.00, and Joan did not have a car at that time to drive the stuff to a post office.
What Joan did NOT tell you, Dr. Hoksbergen, is that K. had sent a money order to Joan to cover the shipping costs. And she wrote and told Joan if she needed to take a cab, to call her and K. would send more money for cabfare. It was my father, who sent some of K.’s belongings to her for $52.50 OUT OF HIS OWN MONEY! –
back to the present – Dr. Rene Hoksbergen is going to be at “Shedding Light on the Adoption Experience, VI” in New York City, at the Park Central Hotel, this weekend, September 24 – 25, 2010. I suggest you go see him and ask him pointblank about the lies Joan Wheeler has told about him in her book.
Don’t take the Three Sippel Sisters word that Joan Wheeler is a liar – go ask TWO of your own – Mr. Joe Soll and Dr. Rene Hoksbergen!
Gert – September 21, 2010
Ruth is correct. I have already written about this appalling episode and it shall be seen here in due time. My entries are following the page/chapter sequence in the book and will be posted in sequence. I have a copy of this letter by Doctor Rene and I have commented line by line about the letter. But, readers will have to wait for it to appear here, in due time.
Joan has so much to answer for…we have only touched the surface.
I request that everyone of those people whom have doubted us birth sisters to contact both Mr. Joe Soll and Dr. Rene Hoksbergen and ask them for yourselves about what we here are asserting.
We have given you proof…now go out there and check it out…don’t believe us…don’t believe Joan…find out for yourselves…unless of course…you WANT be taken for a ride by Joan.
Ruth here again – ok this is a lot to go thru – but here is the correspondence regarding Joan and Rene about Kathy’s belongings. First up – Joan’s acknowledgement that she got the money order. Then Dad’s recipts where he only spent about $150.00, then the letter from Rene lecturing Kathy, and saying it would cost $500. Then Kathy’s letter to Rene. Happy reading! but first here are 2 additional comment from Gert and myself. Please keep them in mind while you reading them. btw when you click on the image, it may shrink back – wait a second, a small orange box will appear on the lower right hand side of the image – click on the box and the image will enlarge again – and you will be able to read it.
yes, there is alot to read here, but Joan has always given LOTS of trouble to her sisters. —So it’s good that people get to see the behind the scenes that Joan NEVER put in her book or wants the public to know about. —It’s good that people get to see what we birth sisters have had to put up with with Joan, the Liar.
Ruth – September 24, 2010 —-and if you see – this letter by Kathy was written in 1993 – 17 years ago – and what does it say?
“Prof. Hoksbergen — why should we feel sorry for a 36 year old woman — she’s not the only one who suffers in life — I want my things back (that Joan stole) — Joan LIED to you — Joan, leave me alone — Joan, stop getting people to do your dirty work — Joan is violating my privacy — Joan won’t take no for an answer — Joan whines and complains she is poor”
Sound familiar? Because it is 17 years later and Joan is STILL DOING THE SAME DAM THING! AND STILL WHINING ABOUT THE SAME DAM THING! — the first image is the letter written by Joan to Kathy where she says she got the money order from Kathy – then whines about why she can’t get Kathy’s belongings to her – her kids were in school all day – the youngest was 10 – her attic wasn’t that big – give me a break – she couldn’t find them. But she sure found them when our Dad yelled at her and he came over in a cab and collected them – and he used the cab to take the stuff to the post office and sent the stuff over to England. WITH HIS OWN MONEY! Joan never gave him anything from the money that Kathy sent to her – nor did Joan return that money to Kathy. She saysin her letter that she put the money into a special account – where? What bank? And if she had the time to go to the bank to set up a special account – then she had time to find the stuff in the attic. And I know the neighborhood she lived in – ain’t no bank there. Closest one was down by Broadway Market – where she would have taken a bus to get to if she didn’t have a car – why all this running around? But no running up the stairs to find the stuff? This makes no sense – she didn’t open a special account at a bank – the “special” account was her own dam pocket! And that’s the dam truth! So Prof. Rene, how does it feel, 17 years later to find out that you were taken for a ride by Joan? Not very good, I would guess. But we know how you feel, believe me, we do – we’ve been there – bullied, manipulated, used, abused, lied to -by the one and only – JOAN WHEELER, BITCH SUPREME!
So the challedge is and will continue to be…for Joan…to ANSWER for her actions…
Why does Joan NOT answer for what she does? Because she is not only a liar but a coward!
Telling the Truth Part 2 – Joan Wheeler – The Three Sippel Sisters September 9, 2010Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: abuse, adoption, adoption reform, adoption reunion, blaming people for your own mess, contradictions, dishonesty, Disrespect, embellishing the truth, false accusations, harassment of an adoptee's birth family, Lies, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, spreading untruths, stupidity, whining
Why does Joan Wheeler need to keep telling us that she is telling the truth?
By Gert McQueen August 14 2010
Well it appears as if Joan does indeed read our blog! Why else does she feel the need to reprint many newspaper articles and then make comments that she is telling the truth. Ruth had posted, August 7, an entry called “To tell the truth, who lies? Joan Wheeler or the Three Sippel Sisters?” And on August 8 Joan starts a 5 part series of pre-printed newspaper articles and her assertion that she has been telling the truth!
It must be pointed out, here, at the beginning of my post, that newspaper articles of the ‘human interest’ type are always sensationalized and biased toward the need to ‘sell papers’. Newspapers themselves are written for a 5th grade reading level. How do I know this? Because I wrote to my local newspaper years ago. I wrote ‘letters to the editor’, for over 3 three years, I was interviewed and had stories written about myself and what I was doing in the community. I was ‘misquoted’ and ‘misrepresented’ by the reporter and newspaper, not once but many many times. When I didn’t like how the newspaper were ‘editing’ my material, I did something about it, I self-published. As a self-published author I, again, had gotten many critics. You will never get everyone to like you or what you write. But, the one thing I have never had was anyone say I had NOT told the truth. Joan can’t say that, for indeed, she has not told the truth in her book. And her recent 5 parter is proof that she is very concerned that her blood sisters are TELLING THE TRUTH.
In Joan’s current ‘rebuttal’ efforts, on her site, she proves that she does read her sisters’ site. She is trying to throw so much information at people as to cloud the truth with yet more bull-shit. I am not going to address the many newspaper articles she posts. I have only read one or two of them when they were published originally and many were published after I left Buffalo NY so I never saw them or knew about them. These newspaper articles are irrelevant. They have nothing to do with the truth. I am only interested in the words that Joan has currently published in her book of lies and her current statements on her blog as she tries to rebuttal our claims of her lying and misrepresenting us, our families, and other families.
If you are interested in seeing the newspaper articles, go to Joan’s site. As I have done in the past I will use Joan’s own words to prove my points.
J: is Joan. G: is Gert
G:… No nothing has really changed, Joan is still Joan and her reunion ended long ago. I don’t see what Joan’s adoption and reunion have to do with Adoption reform anyway. Joan’s assertion that she doesn’t want other families to go through what she has is a NON-ISSUE. Joan wrote the book and is in adoption reform because that is where Joan can get ATTENTION and continue to be a VICTIM.
J: Today, I embark on a 5-part series of a look back into time. I will be reflecting on a slice of my reunion as well as adoption reform 26 years ago and relating it to the present situations.
G:… The big question is…why does she feel the need to ‘look back into time’? Didn’t she write a damn book about her life already? So she needs to ‘reflect’ on a ‘slice of’…gee when does she LIVE FOR TODAY? The past is over, get on with living today! I can’t wait to find out what ‘slice’ of’ her reunion she wants to reflect on! She really ought to wait and read our blog posts before she goes and puts her foot in her mouth again. Oh ‘present situations’, that’s gotta be a good one, can’t wait to see what new and interesting things have been happening to Joan!
J: Here’s Part 1 of my 5-part series: Part 1: Registry Law Unjust to Adoptees
I begin with an article I wrote 26 years ago today: “Registry Law Unjust to Adoptees”, published as a Letter to the Editor in The Buffalo News. This article can also be found in My Archives Pages in this website.
G:… So if the article can be found in her archives why the need to reprint it here? To prove her point of course! Joan has an agenda. As I’ve said, I’m not interested in these articles, they prove nothing and are not adequate source materials to prove that Joan has spoken any truth.
J: The New York State Registry has undergone a few changes since 1984. What I do know has changed is that adoptees no longer must seek written permission from their adoptive parents and natural parents to obtain basic information about themselves. However, I do believe the provision still exists that dead people cannot register, therefore, the past and current New York State Registry would do me no good at all because my natural mother died 54 years ago and cannot file to a mutual-consent registry. Mutual consent registries do not give adoptees access to their sealed birth certificates. Also, media still addresses adoptees as “adopted children”.
G:… of course dead people can not register, they are dead.
Part 2: The Buffalo News 3-Part Series Search for Yesterday (Natural Mothers) 1984 2010.08.09 Part 2: The Buffalo News 3-Part Series Search for Yesterday (Natural Mothers) 1984
J: In the early 1980s, because of my participation in local adoption reform support groups and writing numerous Letters to the Editor, I was contacted by a reporter to be a part of this newspaper series. I will highlight one article per day of this series as each was written on a different day. Copies of these articles, along with these notes, will be posted in My Archives Pages in this website. The first in The Buffalo News series “Search for Yesterday” is the following article. Of note is natural mother and author Lorraine Dusky (Birthmark, 1979). The fictitiously-named Ms. Higgins is a natural mother who was not known by any members of the local adoption group in Buffalo at the time.
G:… I too have experience with letter writing to an editor of a newspaper and I too was interviewed by a reporter, about my topic I was writing about, and I too was contacted by a reporter to give my opinions about my topic in a series of articles. So what’s the big deal? Many people have many interests and many people write and are interviewed in a local newspaper. Joan is not unique in that.
J: Times have changed. With the Internet, underground searches are not necessary as anyone can search for just about anyone they want to find, with or without adoptee access to their original birth certificates, and with or without Mutual Consent Registries.
G:… Okay, things have changed. Again, what is the point of rehashing all of this today? Joan has an agenda! Attention getting proving she has told the truth, but others have misrepresented her. Oh gee, and she wonders why her three sisters are pissed off over what Joan has said about us in the book. (Ruth’s note: People getting misrepresented in print is a non-issue – EXCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO JOAN. Her whole dam book is a misrepresentation by Joan of me and my family, but WHOA! Don’t let ANYBODY misrepresent Little Miss Joan!)
J: It must be stated that there are many facets of adoption, search and reunion. This newspaper series focused mainly on the emotional aspects. The real civil rights aspects — sealing and falsifying adoptees’ birth certificates and denying us access — was not a high priority in the news media back in 1984. Is it really a priority today?
G:… There are indeed ‘many facets of adoption’ and what Joan doesn’t like about many of those facets, she tries to kill. She really doesn’t understand many of the reasons why adoption exists in the world and why people adopt. But wait…if you stay tune to our blog where we refute Joan’s book you will see all of those reason and how she has reacted to them over the years. Oh yes, Joan is starting to show concern for what we sisters will say about the book, that is why she is doing this 5 part series!
J: 2010.08.10 Here is the main article that offended my adoptive family and natural family because I went public — I put my face and name in the newspaper. Though I had been interviewed for newspaper and radio and public television on and off since 1976, and had been writing Letters to the Editor since 1975 (paid articles didn’t come along for a few more years at this time), this article with a larger-than-the-others photo of me really annoyed my relatives. This wasn’t my idea – the photo – it was the newspaper reporter’s idea. My natural family and my adoptive family would have much preferred that I kept quiet. I was labeled as conceited. I had been reunited and the secret outed ten years earlier, but certain people in both my adoptive family and natural family were angry for me putting my face and name in the public’s eye. But this was not the first time I had done so. I had been writing in the newspaper, and have been interviewed in the paper, since 1975, at the age of 19. I had been interviewed on radio and TV for several interviews beginning in 1976. Those tapes have long ago disapeared as they warped with age. If they hadn’t, I’d print transcripts of those 2 and 4-hour interviews. Ruth’s note: NOWHERE does Joan say, on the internet, in her book, on her website, NOWHERE does she mention that one TV interview included ME! In 1981, Joan and I were interviewed by reporter Rich Kellman at WGRZ-TV, Buffalo, New York on – TA-DA! ADOPTION!YES, I was in SUPPORT OF HER AND HER ADOPTION SOCIAL WORK! But she keeps saying that her entire birth family was AGAINST her. LIAR!
G:… I NEVER SAW THIS ARTICLE At the time I was not living in Buffalo and had no idea what Joan was up too. Again, watch our blog for FULL DETAILS about the lies in Joan’s book. We have REAL EVIDENCE of Joan’s own dirty deeds towards her families.
Word of advice: if you put your ‘face and name in the newspaper’ or in a book, you will get negative reactions. What Joan has never understood is that she DOES NOT LIVE IN A VACUUM. There are many other people that have real concerns about their lives being ‘an open book’. That is why we are writing this blog, because Joan not only puts our lives in the open she lied and misrepresented our lives and NEVER ONCE told about her own misdeeds to family members. This is not acceptable. To my mind, as long as Joan had ‘talked’ about writing the stupid book I could have cared less, but as soon as she made a mockery about of our lives I took my stand against it and her. By publishing a book she has opened herself up to massive and intense criticism by those she lays open in the book.
Joan’s states here ‘…a larger-than-the-others photo of me really annoyed my relatives. This wasn’t my idea – the photo – it was the newspaper reporter’s idea…’ And that should surprise her! Number ONE Joan doesn’t understand family privacy issues. And of course it was the reporter’s idea! That’s why THEY get paid, to sell newspapers! And when some human interest story comes along, with hot-button issues, those reporters will go out of their way to get the story and the picture. But, Joan doesn’t know that, she blames her family for their own rightfully negative reactions to her actions and points the finger at them as the cause of all Joan’s problems. The family is being unreasonable, they don’t understand me! Bull Shit!
Today, August of 2010, Joan still has a great NEED for attention, she has to drag all this out again and again. She wrote and PUBLISHED the book already! What is the purpose, this need to tell it all again? Joan has an agenda, and it isn’t adoption reform! She wants to tell the world that she has told the truth and that her sisters are the liars! She wants the attention, well she will get the attention, because we sisters will continue to tell the world every thing that Joan has done to us and we will continue to refute what she has written in the book, so, stay tune. WE HAVE ONLY JUST BEGUN.
J: In the nearly-full-page photo and article posted here, please note that the reporter misquoted me several times. That will be discussed following the article itself. Two other adoptees, one age 19 and the other age 18, were interviewed as well.
G:… reporters ALWAYS misquote, that’s the nature of newspapers who want to sell papers by using human interest hot-button issues.
J: Though the author of the article, newspaper reporter Paula Voell, gave a good overview of the plight of adoptees in search, she misquoted me. I did not search for my natural family, rather, I was found by my natural family.
G:…Why point this out again? She was misquoted, she didn’t search she was found. She wrote the book already, what’s the point of this posting of all this stuff now? Joan has an agenda. She is a victim and she wants attention.
J: My natural and adoptive relatives who read the first few paragraphs were upset when they read, “To obscure their true origins, some were told their mothers died in childbirth…the false information…” Both of my families were devastated by this statement which linked me to the two other adoptees who were lied to about their natural mothers’ deaths.
G:…That’s what happens in newspaper articles, I’ll say it again, newspapers are in the business of selling papers and hot-button human interest issues SELL papers. It is RARE that the truth is presented in a newspaper article of a hot-botton human interest story. get over it.
J: For days after this newspaper article’s publication, I received numerous angry phone calls and hate mail from relatives wanting to know why I had told the reporter these lies. Fact is, I didn’t lie. It was the interpretation of the readers that led to their reactions to me and to the article. Also, even though I had been told (during my childhood) that my natural mother died, HOW and WHEN she died was not told to me while I was growing up. MANY stories were told to me by many people after I was found at age 18 and many of these stories conflicted with each other.
G:…In the book, Joan details all this, again, why is this shit being talked about again? In the book the phone calls and mail came from the ADOPTIVE FAMILY. And you know what? They had a right to be upset, their lives were being misrepresented, just as they are in the book. The same is true for the birth family. They DID NOT make calls or send mail, but they had every right to be upset. And how does Joan get around not taking the consequences of her own actions? By stating ‘It was the interpretation of the readers that led to their reactions to me and to the article’ How convenient! Blame it all on the ‘interpretation of the readers’. As in every family in the entire world, where there is more than one you will have that many more versions of the story.
J: My relatives were also upset over this paragraph: “While family members and neighbors knew that her mother had been ill, she had been advised not to become pregnant and had subsequently died while giving birth to her…” Both of my families were angry that I relayed distorted information to the reporter. Relatives telephone me and angrily yelled: “That’s not what happened! We told you what happened, you can’t get it straight that your mother did not die in childbirth! She died two or three months after your birth and she died of cancer and not because she was pregnant with you!”
G:…AND WHY PRINT THIS AGAIN HERE. Joan is brain dead! And she wonders why the families get upset with her. WHAT IS THE NEED AND REASON TO REPRINT LIES. Because Joan has a great NEED to KEEP IT UP. She does NOT want to let this die out. She needs to continue to show the world that her two families were upset with her. Joan is a VICTIM and she will continue to tell the world.
J: The constant yelling at me about my mother’s death further eroded my emotional state. Grief at having lost my mother and having that knowledge denied to me for the first 18 years of my life in the true aspects and facts of her death were overshadowed because of the constant bombardment from relatives telling me their versions of the truth.
G:…Who was yelling at her….her adoptive mother that’s who. That is who Joan really hates, the adoptive mother. Grieving? Okay one never gets over the death of a parent, or anyone else, but if that is all you do with the life that you are given, that is grieve, what life do you have? Joan has no life because she has CHOOSEN to have this life that she keeps writing about. (Ruth’s note: yes, the only person yelling at her was her adoptive mother. It wasn’t me.)
J: What I told the reporter was the collective “truths” told to me by many relatives (both natural family and adoptive family). The reporter shortened the stories to suit the length of the newspaper article. The article had some accurate passages, however, which angered my relatives even more than the misquotes: “Why should one group know everything and the adoptee not know anything?” and “Adoptive parents are confused. We adult adoptees are coming out and saying ‘You did it all wrong.’ They need guidance, too.” Both adoptive and natural relatives attacked me because of key phrases like “you did it all wrong”. Many aspects of my adoption were wrong. Over and above my own adoption, the system of adoption has people tied up. The SYSTEM needs to change. That was my message then, as well as now. Change the system, and eventually people’s attitudes will change, too. And yes, my adoptive parents lied to me and prevented me from knowing key truths about my life, and for that, they, and other relatives who kept their secrets, were wrong.
G:…Seems to me that if you, anyone, sees adoption as some sort of secret, as Joan does, then you have set yourself up for heartache and troubles. I know the heartache our father had in making the decision to put Joan (Doris) up for adoption when he did, the reasons were right and needed, that is what happens in life; major hard decisions must be made. Joan’s adoptive parents made a major decision to adopt her and make up stories over the years because of their internal emotional makeup. It is NOT THE SYSTEM THAT IS BROKEN, IT IS THE PEOPLE INVOLVED. Real adoption reform should begin with the emotional makeup of the adoptive parents, which will always be a flawed thing, people being people are not perfect and so you will never have a perfect adoption. Get over it!
J: Today, it seems that many members of both my extended adopted family and natural family are still upset that I have gone public.
G:…And you want WHAT from us?
Ruth’s note: what I am upset about her going public is the dam LIES she tells about me and others.
J: I wrote my memoir, Forbidden Family, with falsified names. Names of dead people are used but names of the living are changed. This still upsets people. I wrote the truth of what happened to me, the adoptee, and my adoptive family and my ex-husband and my children as a result of other people’s misinterpretations and judgments of me. I cannot be responsible for other people’s opinions of me, I can only be responsible for myself. I wrote a book of truth. I wouldn’t have written a book of lies. Every page was carefully vetted by editors, counselors, a literary attorney. Trafford Publishing’s legal division also approved of the content of the book.
Ruth’s note: not all names of living people were changed. And no, she did NOT tell the truth.
G:…A memoir by its very nature is not truthful. No one sees their life in all honestly. We sisters feel it an HONOR issue when it comes to the DISHONORING of our parents names, both dead and alive, and our own names and lives to be exposed as Joan has done to us. This book is no memoir, it is a dirty tell-all, according to Joan, where Joan repeats many things that NEVER should have been repeated outside of any relative’s kitchent table. And because Joan has done that people will continue to be upset. Joan’s book does not tell the truth, read this blog to see our rebuttals to every page of the book.
Yes, Joan, you can and should be responsible for the opinions that others have of you! You are your deeds, you are your words and we sisters will make you eat each and every lie, untruth, misrepresentation and fabrication in that book. And Joan you don’t even take responsible for yourself. Instead of giving the families peace you give them grief. Joan you did not write a book of truth, you did write a book of lies.
The editors did not carefully vet the book. I point out many many errors, in spelling, grammar etc and as far as content…NO ONE FROM THE PUBLISHER EVER SPOKE TO ME ABOUT THE TRUTH OF MY LIFE AND WHAT WAS BEING WRITTEN ABOUT ME IN THE BOOK.
Ruth’s note: I like the mistake where Joan is talking about me and her daughter, then gets us both mixed up. She starts the paragraph talking about one of us, then she talks about the other one, then names me by her daughter’s name. LOL – what jackass “editor” edited this book?
J: My purpose then — when I began writing about my adoption publicly in 1975 in Erie, Pa and in Buffalo, New York in 1976, and in this interviewed newspaper article in 1984 — and now in 2010 — is to write my truth and to promote adoption reform.
G:…No Joan, you don’t know what the truth is, you only know and care about herself and how you SEE THINGS. You don’t give a damn about adoption reform, it is only a means to the end….the end being an avenue for you to whine and cry and be a victim.
I am not done with you, Joan, until you pull the book from all book sellers and make a public apology to both families and then KEEP SILENT the rest of your life.