jump to navigation

What is Joan Wheeler going to do? …Revisited! By Gert McQueen March 30, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

I would like to clarify something…I had read most of and written much about Joan’s book of lies in the early part of 2010. There were about 4 separate posts that I had written between March and April of 2010 but did not email them to Ruth until May 10, 2010. The first of those posts had finally found its way onto this blog on March 16, 2011. I feel that it is very important to make this clear for I had written the post entitled ‘More of the same, payback’s a bitch and what is Joan going to do’ back in March of 2010 a full year before it was posted and before the central theme ‘what is Joan going to do’ became a reality. I wonder if I’m psychic!

In any event, there you have it…now on to some other points. Even if things may be redundant, it is always good to ‘go over a point or two’ for, when dealing with Joan, one must always refer to the ‘documentation’ to prove that Joan is a liar. Joan herself has never learned that basic fact of life…if you really want to prove your point, get the documentation and make sure that the other guy’s documentation is worthless! How, you may ask, can you know if the other guy’s documentation is worthless? Easy! The truth always wins out!

Have any readers noticed how very little Kathy has said and contributed to this blog and the discussions about the book and/or Joan and her activities? There is a very good reason and of course Joan has never gotten it. Kathy has stated that she has no comment and whenever she feels the need to speak she is fully capable of speaking. But Joan has this thing about the Three Sippel Sisters, as she has called us. Joan forgets that we are three separate sisters and do not speak or act as one unit. Ruth herself has pointed that out before but I mention it again here because I wanted to point out another interesting fact. How can it be that Ruth and Gert, that’s me, can have so much to say about the SAME episodes that Joan writes about? Very simple, we have had years of experiences with her and we have read ‘deeply’ this book and we know how she thinks or doesn’t think, as the case may be.

Okay you can call it something else, like it’s a ‘one-two-punch’ given by Gert and Ruth. Well from our seats Joan deserves it. She was the one who made the stupid mistake of writing lies about other people and then believing that we would never do anything about it. Stupid, stupid, stupid! Never ever give your opponent the opportunity to go after you! That’s what’s wrong with Joan…she believes, without a doubt, that she is right and everyone else is wrong! So, now its time for Joan to pay the price for her folly by having all her lies exposed, by the very family that she sought to exploit!

 In previous posts, and posts that have yet to be posted, I have discussed the issue of Joan’s ‘inner life’, as she describes it, and her lack of a healthy ‘inner life’. Many times, in the book of lies, Joan attempts to give us some indication that she sought out or was exposed to some kind of positive spirituality, but try as she might, she just can’t maintain that positive atmosphere. If she were able to, be positive, the book of lies would not have been written nor published, with over 600 pages of pure hate and torment! You readers are spared the pain of paying over $45 for it by just reading this blog, for we give you more than enough page references and direct quotes from the lying book for you to see just how god-awful the inner torment of Joan is.

 Joan doesn’t know the first thing about any kind of inner healing! The first thing she would have to do is ‘let go’ of this book of lies and her hatred to her adoptive and birth families…but she is unable to do…she LIKES the inner life she has, for it is the ONLY life she has! She did not and has not had me in her life since 1982 and yet she has the audacity to write lie upon lie, misrepresentation upon misrepresentation, about me and my intentions and present them in a written venue! What is the purpose! It is HER LIFE, how she SAW and FELT anything and THAT makes it OKAY to tell lies about others! Wrong, wrong, wrong! She could not do any kind of inner healing and let go of hating me, in 1992 or in 2005 when I made attempts to reconcile with her, for to do so would mean that she could NOT PUBLISH her life story! Without her hate, there is NO STORY! Without her hate, she has no LIFE! And now that she is a full orphan…what is Joan Wheeler going to do?

There’s more to come. I have read this entire book of lies and you shall all hear what I have to say about it.

Advertisements

Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler Chapters 22, 23, and 24 pages 222 – 257 – REFUTED! – Part 2 by Ruth Pace March 25, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
 In a post written by Gert McQueen on May 10, 2010 and posted to this blog last week on March 16, 2011, Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler Chapter 22- More of the same, payback’s a bitch and what is Joan going to do! Gert says the following about Chapter 22, A New Family “it’s more of the same stuff we have read before, another redundant chapter.”

 I agree, more whining, more digs aimed at her birth sisters.

She starts out the chapter by saying that prayer and meditation from an aunt and uncle helped strengthen her spirituality. Influenced her in inner healing. Really? I don’t see much evidence to this. Her spirituality? To what? To have that confidence in one’s own spirituality that there is no need to trash another person’s religion? HA! We see Joan trashing the Catholic Church left and right and her sisters’ (me and Gert) Neo-Pagan paths. Inner healing? HA! All over the book and to this day, Joan writes about her tormented inner life.

On page 222, she relates how she saw two Liverpool, England musicians in concert in Buffalo, New York. These 2 people knew our sister Kathy in Liverpool. Joan writes, “I wondered why Edith (Kathy) didn’t take me to see them in Liverpool.” Oh whine.

Well, let’s see, why didn’t Kathy take her to see them? Does Joan mean to see them perform or see them socially? As the poor writer that she is, she doesn’t make the distinction. But there are lot’s of reasons why Kathy didn’t take her to “see” them. Maybe they weren’t performing when Joan was there. Maybe they were out of the country, performing in Germany maybe. Maybe one of them had the flu. Maybe one of them had a death in the family! Did Joan ever bother to ask Kathy? And maybe put the dam TRUTH in her book? NO! And quite frankly WHO GIVES A SHIT? And what does this have to do with Joan’s adoption, Joan’s adoption reunion, and Joan’s adoption reform work? NOTHING!

This is an example of why this book is a piece of shit! The book is peppered with these kinds of questions! Questions from Joan’s tormented mind – but she never gives her readers the TRUTHFUL answers to these questions. Joan just loves to SPECULATE on people’s motives of their day to day lives. She should stop that shit and pay attention to her own miserable life. Maybe put into practice what Aunt Helen and Uncle Dom were trying to tell her.

But Joan doesn’t want to do that – she doesn’t bother to do proper research – and tell the truth. It’s much easier to write a speculative question, because it’s a clever ploy – to show that Kathy was a negligent bitch to Joan – she didn’t take Joan to see a couple of musicians. You know, Kathy knows a lot of musicians in England, seeing as she is a musician herself. So Kathy is supposed to take Joan to meet every single musician that she knows. On the outside chance that they may travel to the States and perform in Buffalo. Yes, everyone on the planet must plan their lives to please Joan. Introduce her to EVERY person they know because if they don’t, she will feel slighted and insulted and whine about it in her book. And it’s a clever ploy to put another insulting dig against one of her birth sisters without the reader being aware of what she is doing.

On page 244 Joan writes this about me: “Brenda (me) was a big comfort. She loved baby Aaron (Joan’s son) and came to see us often.” Remember this when she writes all over the internet how I hate her kids. Notice how Joan contradicts herself left and right – that’s because she can’t stick to the TRUTH!

Another thing she likes to do is LIE about me concerning  her kids is that I am jealous of her because she has two kids and I am infertile. In June 1985, I suffered a miscarriage, after several years of trying to conceive. Yet, she writes that I’m taking her son to outings in 1985. And both of her kids to the beach in 1989 and 1990.  She just can’t stick to one story.

On page 248, she writes about the backlash of her doing an interview in the newspaper on adoption and getting a few facts wrong. This topic is covered in Gert’s post and I have already written about it. But she says on page 248 “There was no one to help me cope with my feelings, except my year-old son.” Um, what was I? Chopped Liver? I thought she said that I came to visit her often! She didn’t say between page 244 and 248 that we suddenly stopped speaking to each other.

On page 253, summer of 1985, she writes, “Brenda and I frequently took 18-month-old Aaron on outings.” Later on in the book, in the years 1988-90, she says the same thing, as we did go to the beach a lot with her kids. But on the internet, on The Huffington Post, she said that she didn’t have a relationship with me for more than three decades. Do the math people: 3 decades = 30 years. 2011 minus 30 is 1981. But it’s right there in black and white on page 244 we’re at the beach in 1984, and on page 253, we’re taking her son to outings in the summer of 1985.

On page 252 she relates how she goes to Charleston, South Carolina to visit her husband, who had gone there for a better job. She says she wasn’t impressed with the city. Well, she is entitled to her opinion, but on page 257, she states she didn’t like the houses in Charleston, because they were “poorly made with staples instead of nails.” What? She is a construction expert? Let’s see, she made this expert opinion in 1985. In 1989, Hurricane Hugo blew into Charleston. While two-thirds of the city’s houses suffered varying degrees of damage (Wikipedia), the city was not leveled. So I guess Joan’s expert assessment on building codes goes in the trash.

Joan goes on to say that her husband suggested a double-wide trailer. She writes: “Bad enough we were already poor; I didn’t want to live in a trailer park to become trailer trash. Maybe that was his goal, but it wasn’t mine.“

Trailer Trash? Trailer Trash? Where does she get off putting people living in trailer parks as trash? What a disgusting, stereotypical, discriminatory thing to say. Does she forget that her own birth brother and his wife, lived in a trailer park when they first moved to Arizona?

In a comment to my post What is the REAL reason behind Joan Wheeler’s rant on the Huffington Post?  March 9, 2011, Gert listed the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics, “Social Workers’ Ethical Responsibilities to Clients.”

In Item 07 – Privacy and Confidentiality article d, we find the following:

Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitatin of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical disability.

Joan likes to spout off and brag that she is a “social worker,” but in her usual contradictory self, she also says she is “unemployed, due to disabilities.” If she’s unemployed, then she is NOT a social worker. She also brags that she is a member of the National Association of Social Workers.

WELL, in her putdown of people living in trailer parks, she is in violation of that code where it says “Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate ….discrimination against any ….CLASS…”

Okay, it talks about social workers and their clients, which Joan doesn’t have any clients, because she’s not working, but if Joan is feeling this in her heart and personal life, how would she treat a client if she had any? Just how would she treat a client that lived in a trailer park, considering she considers people living in trailer parks as trash. Perhaps we should count our blessings that Joan is NOT a working social worker – she’d be very detrimental to her clients with her bigoted way of thinking – and heaven help any client who ADOPTED a child. Yes, yes, I’m indulging in a bit of speculative thinking myself – but we all know dam well what Joan would do. It’s right there in her book – she has chronciled herself putting down people in meetings, classrooms, her own professors and classmates while getting her social work degree, even the Association of Social Workers. I guess I’m not really speculating after all – just telling the  truth, using Joan’s own words from her own trashy book. After all, it’s right there in black and white on page 257: trailer trash.

The Social Worker’s Code also doesn’t include a client’s income, but it does say CLASS, which in this case would be poor people. And Joan already said that her and her husband and year old son were POOR, so in other words, she was putting herself down.

After Joan puts down residents of trailer parks, Joan then says “I wanted a better life.” I can’t fault her there. Everybody wants a better life. That’s why they GET OFF THEIR ASS AND GET A JOB! TO WORK TOWARDS THAT BETTER LIFE!

In writing about her birth brother in 2003, when the family goes to Arizona for his funeral, Joan writes in her book about how “rich” he and his wife were. No, they weren’t “rich,” they were upper middle class. And their beautiful house was the reward of years of WORKING AT JOBS!

In 1976, when my brother and his wife moved to Arizona, they filed for bankruptcy, sold their belongings, packed up their little Toyota Corolla, and drove across the country in search of their better life. And through hard work, they achieved it. And yes, at first they lived in a TRAILER PARK! And they weren’t TRASH! But again, as we see over and over and over again throughout this TRASHY book, Joan M. Wheeler puts down her birth family as trash. The only trash from the Sippel family is Joan herself and her book.

Joan doesn’t want ADOPTEES to be discriminated against – yet turns around and says this discriminatory statement against residents of trailer parks.

My first apartment in 1971, was a room in a boarding house. I was working as a cashier for Twin Fair, a K-Mart type store. I then roomed with an older woman, while I took classes in 1972 to become a nurses aide in September 1972. In early 1973, I moved back to my father’s house to help out with the kids, while working full time nights at the hospital, where 38 years later, I am still working. During 1973 and into 1974, I saved my money and in May 1974, I got my first real apartment. In 1975, I moved into a larger apartment with my first husband, and each subsequent apartment was a bit nicer than the last. In May 1987, my present husband and I moved into a rented HOUSE, which in 1996, we bought off the landlord.

I’m also looking for the “better life.” And am working towards it. My husband and I are secure in our house, doing renovations as time and money permits. Our long term plans are to have the renovations done in about 10 years, and then turn our attention to the acquiring and landscaping of the empty lot next to us.

What’s Joan doing? Living in fantasyland. Waiting for a movie to made out of her trashy book. Sorry Joan, not even Oprah is going to feature this trashy book on Oprah’s Book Club – because when she sees how you put down trailer people, she’s going to see you for what you are – a bigot, and a liar. Someone who puts down and insults and lies about her own birth family. And don’t even try to ride in on the adoption coattail – just because Oprah recently introduced her adopted out birth sister to the world. Oprah isn’t stupid, nor is most of the world – we all see Joan for what she is.

And what will Joan do? Now that her meal ticket is gone.

addendum: March 26, 4:40am. by Ruth Pace

The following is from an adoptee forum. And I have a question for the author: Romany, have you Deeply Read the above and what your buddy Joan has said about poor people being TRASH?


———————————————–

Title: Re: Single mother’s…Thanks Huckabee for your insight..
Post by: Romany on March 06, 2011, 03:17:35 PM

The trouble is – people like him divide the world into “good” (educated, moral, productive, financially sound) and “not good” (uneducated, immoral, unproductive, poor).  There are no educated, immoral, productive, poor people just as there are no uneducated, moral, unproductive, financially sound people – or any other combination.  The “good” people have all the “good” attributes and the “not good” people have nothing.  Morality (his version) leads to good things and immorality (his version) leads to bad things because that’s what his god tells him.

And according to her book Forbidden Family, Joan Wheeler also divides the world into “good” people – those who do not live in trailer parks, and “not good ” people – those who do live in trailer parks.  I don’t even want to touch Joan’s “morality” because I dont’ think I can – she doesn’t have any morals.

Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler Chapter 22- More of the same, payback’s a bitch and what is Joan going to do! March 16, 2011

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

Introduction by Ruth Pace

This post was written by Gert McQueen May 10, 2010. Due to our busy lives, and other distractions by Joan (posting other crap on the internet that needed to be addressed, and other events in our lives, this post and others, have been in storage. But now we get to back to the business of Refuting the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler.

Chapter 22 a new family; its more of the same stuff we have read before, another redundant chapter. It starts off in early 1982, after adoptive father dies, she states (pg 222) that ‘…only one from her natural family was there for her, Ruth, who also helped in defending her from Gert’s (that’s me) continued harassment through letters and phone calls.’ Well, it is obviously that Ruth would be supporting Joan at this time because they were in it together over my daughter. As far as these letters and phone calls are concerned, I haven’t a clue about that; it was not I! In 82 my family was in the process of moving, had moved and where getting on with our lives, with my daughter in foster care, by my own hand.

(Ruth’s note: Actually, I did not defend Joan, because Joan went against my instructions: NOT to bring strangers into a family matter. We did have to appear in court together because we were both involved).

Pg 223 Joan relates how she meets husband to be Colby, a medieval re-enactor, whom she is fascinated with, pg 225 she finds herself pregnant. We have to read a ‘blow by blow’ of the huge tormented fights between Joan and Dorothy (adoptive mother). I have found it interesting that these two women can’t live with each other and can’t live without each other! I also find the word tormented is used a lot by Joan and Dorothy. This book is really a study in the horrors of a mental illness that is shared by them!

Even though Dorothy would not attend Joan and Colby’s wedding she sends Joan a $3000 check for expenses. It must be nice to have a bank roll anytime you want it, that must be why Joan has spent her entire life with this crazy person. What the hell is Joan going to do when Dorothy dies? The extended adoptive family of Wheeler, whom I never met outside of this book, must all be a piece of work, but yet, Joan believes that it is the birth family that always does dirt to her. My theory? It’s either Joan or some member of the Wheeler clan or Dorothy herself.

On pg 228 Joan relates how Dorothy sends her harassing letters. You know the thought just hit me! Maybe it’s been Dorothy all along that had sent all those letters claiming it was I! Remember that letter where, point-by-point, I addressed the ‘letter’ I was supposed to have written? Facts are Stubborn Things Part 4 November 10, 2010. Perhaps Dorothy had been behind the scenes right from the beginning, putting words in Joan’s mouth to say what I said. You never know when dealing with paranoia; just because they aren’t there doesn’t mean that they aren’t watching!

On pg 228 Joan is advised by the doctor to ‘cut off communication with Mom or risk getting so upset that harm or loss of the baby could happen.’ Sounds like good advise, but no, these two women need each other like the air they breathe, what is Joan going to do? And it looks like all of 1982 and 1983 it was Dorothy that was sending Joan letters. On pg 229 Joan wonders what is wrong with her adoptive family members because they can’t accept her relationship with her natural father. Joan states ‘this was my private life, not theirs.’ Well guess what! Joan is finally getting some pay back! Wasn’t ‘this was my private life’ what I told her when she interfered in my life? Pay back’s a bitch!

(Ruth’s note: NOBODY is entitled to a private life – only Joan. MY private life, was (and is) constantly compromised by Joan. From 1994 to the present. Yet Joan keeps screaming for HER privacy!).

Pg 230-232 shows us a long letter from Joan to Dorothy, they can’t leave each other alone, Joan is repeating to her mother the same shit that the mother has said to Joan, it is counter projecting, they feed off each other, what is Joan going to do? Pg 232, Joan starts to question activities within the Medieval reenactment groups because of the outdated characteristics of the time periods they perform. Funny thing about history, it just won’t fit your personal modern views of things! And they don’t square with her modern feministic adoption reform activist mindset and modes of operations. So another Honeymoon phrase is about to end.

She details an anonymous letter, on pg 233, that she received, she states she never knew who wrote it, but I find it very interesting that on pg 234, the letter writer said ‘while you (Joan) wore these dresses (that her adoptive mother made), your birth siblings wore rags.’ Why do I find that interesting, because Joan is, quite fond, of referring, to her birth family as being dirt poor and having rags to wear. Could it be that this letter is the source of those comments? Did Joan take the words from some unknown ‘relative’ and used that as proof that our family was so poor? Or is Joan regurgitating the same hateful lies that Dorothy has told Joan all of her life! Could this letter been from Dorothy herself?

(Ruth’s note: while we did wear hand-me-downs, they were not quite rags. Yes, not as nice as the hand-made dresses that Dorothy made for Joan, but not rags. Since it has been Dorothy, who according to Joan in various places in her book, keeps “ragging” on about how dirt-poor we Sippel kids were (even telling a fish tale of how Dorothy and Edward sent over a xmas tree and presents for us – bullshit – ), it is clear who wrote the letter).

On pg 235, now newly married, with little money and a baby on the way, there are no problems in the way, for Joan and new husband Colby, to go on a trip to see music groups, all they had to do was ask a relative! Must be nice! ‘C’s mother cosigned a loan for us, my mother helped us pack…. we drove down to Baltimore…toured Washington DC…’ Damn it must be nice to be grown adults and have older parents to pack for you and give you the means to go on a vacation! What is Joan going to do when reality hits her?

But for the moment it is back to real life, a baby is born in 1983. We, the readers, have to learn all about ‘excruciatingly painful labor’ and ‘postpartum depression’ and ‘I missed the baby inside, even though I had him in my arms’. Joan is not the first person to ever have a baby! So is this the ‘new family’? Will it be more of the same? Will there be more paybacks? And what is Joan going to do!

In chapter 23 Joan takes on the Catholic Church, some people just never learn! Trying to make any sense out of church procedures or doctrine is such a waste of valuable time and energy, but Joan, still in disbelief that the church had to bend the knee to the State Health Department and the Federal government of the USA, must fight on. She can’t understand why the church would lie about her amended baptismal certificate when church doctrine says that lying is a sin. News flash! The Church always lies! Joan lies! What planet is Joan on? She states, pg 240, ‘…I know God isn’t responsible for all of this (the amended baptismal certificate etc)…it is organized religions, with their rules and doctrines, which are subjected to a higher power – our government. Wasn’t this country founded upon the separation of church and state?’

What the hell?! She really is all screwed up. The separation of church and state has nothing to do with legal documents. Anyone or any organization that resides in this country, or any country for that matter, must obey the rules of the land, that’s common sense, a shared community must have rules that everyone and every organization lives by. The government of the land is not a ‘higher power’, just a civil power. The Church does not take kindly that a civil power would be the ‘higher power’ for they regard that to be their right and privilege. Joan apparently has not heard of ‘give unto Caesar’? Joan, in all her wisdom, says that the government of the land ‘should not interfere by requiring church officials to change baptismal records to accommodate an adoption, it is unethical, immoral and irresponsible…’ Imagine that, Joan saying that interfering is unethical, immoral and irresponsible! Since she herself is not the ‘government’ than it must be okay for her to interfere, for that is what she always does, interfere with other people’s lives. Pay back’s a bitch! These two paragraphs sum up the entire chapter that mostly was more of the same kind of self-indulgence of Joan’s personal woes and misconceptions. This was a totally redundant chapter.

Chapter 24 starts off with Joan being accused of child abuse and her assumption that I am ‘retaliating’ against her. First you know what they say about the word assume? When you assume you make an ‘ass’ out of ‘u’ and ‘me’! So why would Joan assume that I, in retaliation, would do such a thing! There is a wisdom that says ‘you always accuse the other of what you would or did do’. And of course Joan states that she did indeed call child abuse on me, ‘…since I (Joan) was responsible for having her (me) investigated through the same Child Abuse Hotline.’ Joan goes on to state ‘…only difference was Gert’s calls were based on revenge, not concern…’ Again Joan is quick to assume that it was me (Gert) who called when in fact, not only did I not, but a person’s name is never given out. I did not know that it was Joan who called on me until I got into Court, because I pursued the false accusations. Perhaps it was Dorothy, she had called Joan every name in the book and disowned her for getting pregnant before marriage, did she not?

Joan’s sanctimonious attitude is getting a bit too obvious at this point in the book considering all the ‘dirt’ she has done to others and all the ‘dirt’ she has done to her adoptive parents, Dorothy in particular, for her statement, pg. 243, to be believable, ‘…if our relationship (her and me) was to end I could accept it, but I couldn’t accept her calling in false child neglect reports for revenge.’ Fact remains that Joan’s calling abuse onto me was proven false, she apparently never gave it a thought that she herself could actually be wrong! So for her to attempt to use ‘concern’ over ‘revenge’ is another means of taking the light off her and unto someone else. Pay back’s a bitch! What is Joan going to do!

She has other concerns too, her own marriage and financial woes. It’s too bad that Joan didn’t pay closer attention to husband/father material or to saving money or getting a job, she could have saved herself a lot of grief. Instead we are treated to more of her tormented life that is filled with, pg 247, ‘…depression, being irritable, focusing on what she missed out of, had no money for rent or food, stayed home, government cheese and butter lines and food stamps, no diapers, waiting for unemployment benefits, then finally going on welfare…’ Welcome to the club! So, where was adopted ‘mommy’? So, where’s the husband? He went south without his family, nice guy! Pg 248 Joan laments that she has no one to ‘…help me cope with my feelings…cursed the failing economy…cursed my mother-in-law…cursed my husband for leaving…’ Where did Joan learn this lament? From Dorothy, we are hearing Dorothy speak here! What is Joan going to do when Dorothy dies! Pay back’s a bitch!

And where was her adoption support group? Are they helping her? Pg 249 ‘…wasn’t there for me…they viewed my personal story in the paper (Oct. 1984) as a egotistical gesture, not a means of getting a message out to the public…was criticized for being an ineffectual leader…’ Its common for newspapers, when doing ‘human interest’ stories to misquote or misled the words and actions of those they interview. Its always a mistake to think that newspapers will do you right, they are in the business of selling papers, like Joan selling this book, and what sells is not necessarily the truth but the sensationalism of a story.

Even our father, who was interviewed for the story, was misquoted, but, before she was to speak with him she jumped to conclusions, as she always does, and, pg 249, she ‘…was insulted…should have terminated our relationship at that point…father went public with clear intention to oppose me…yet nothing (she) said was meant to hurt or ridicule him…’ Amazing what happens when you don’t think before jumping into the fire! But that’s Joan for you; she never puts the brain in gear first, then wonders why everyone is out to get her! It’s called paranoia! And she is so ready to dump the birth father at the first opportunity, sounds like learned behavior to me! What is Joan going to do! Pay back’s a bitch!

(Ruth’s note: Joan agreed to be interviewed for an article on adoption in The Buffalo News. Apparently, according to Joan, the reporter misquoted her. I don’t think the reporter misquoted her at all. As I recall, Joan was quoted as getting the details of our mother’s death wrong, and that was why our maternal aunt called her up and bitched her out. Sounds like Joan. Because even in 2010, on her blog, Joan continues to detail our mother’s death wrong.

 Joan then tells on page 249, that my father was in another article on adoption in The Buffalo, relating a birthparent’s view on being reunited with her. Joan trips up here. She quotes the paper, but puts it this way: “My father said..” but then on page 250, she says that my father said that the paper misquoted him. So her first statement should have read “The newspaper had my father saying…” For such an accomplished author, Joan sure makes a lot of contradictory mistakes.

So what did my father say? According the paper, “It was difficult to assimilate an adopted person into the existing structure.” And “Biological bonds don’t necessarily lead to a strong relationship…Don’t try to fit into that family. It doesn’t always work.”

 Misquoted? I don’t think so. Sounds just like my father. And guess what people? He DID say this. I talked to him about the article and he didn’t say anything about the reporter misquoting him. And I totally agree with what he said BECAUSE IT’S THE DAM TRUTH. Joan and I share a biological bond with each other – do you see us all lovey-dovey?

 Oh, but Joan has to go off the deep end and claim in her book that she was insulted by my father’s words. Nobody can have an opposing viewpoint to her without her reading insults into every dam word. Grow up Joan. Lots of people disagree with me – I don’t get insulted and go off bitching and moaning and claiming personal insults.

Oh, but on page 250, she relates a conversation with Dad, “I see your point, but I disagree,” she tells him. Gee, I didn’t see my father going off on a psychotic rant because gasp Joan disagreed with him and claiming Joan insulted him. But remember folks – Joan can disagree with YOU, but don’t you EVER disagree with HER! It’s right there in black and white on pages 249-250 – my father is not allowed to disagree with her, but she can disagree with him.

 Gert does have a point about reporters misquoting people, but I don’t think that’s what happened here. —  back to Gert’s post, which continues talking about the newspaper article:

In response to an adoptive parent saying there was a ‘fringe benefit’ to adopting foreign babies, Joan speaks with authority and says, pg 250, ‘…this wasn’t love, this was obsessive ownership of an innocent child….’ That certainly sounds like Dorothy speak to me! On pg 250 Joan explains, to our father, her version of why he had placed her up for adoption. She maintains ‘…the push was for you (dad) to give me (Joan) to two parents, to separate our family…’ She maintains that it could have been arranged differently with an open adoption where all would be known to each other. Joan does not understand the way the world operated in the 50’s. She is putting today’s notions, actually when she claims to have had this conversation it was 1985, so the 80s onto the 50s. It doesn’t work. Hollywood has been doing that ever since it began. You cannot put today’s language and social styles onto other time periods and be effective. 1950 views of family/adoption were very different from the 80s and today and no amount of telling yourself a fantasy everyday is going to change that reality. Joan doesn’t want to accept the fact of reality of the time period of her birth and the real circumstance that her father had to make for all of his family.

(Ruth’s note: and for the umpteenth time, in the 1950’s, THERE WERE NO DAYCARE CENTERS. NO WELFARE SYSTEM LIKE WE HAVE IN THE PRESENT OR EVEN IN THE 80’S. And as for Joan’s constant whining about KINSOLVING and GUARDIANSHIP– again, Joan refuses to accept what she has been told over and over and over again – THERE WAS NO ONE, NOT EVEN KIN WHO COULD HAVE TAKEN HER IN! Between my father’s parents being ELDERLY, one working outside the home, the other DEAF AND WITH ONE LEG, other relatives busy with their own numerous offspring, nobody (and that means KIN, was able to take in an entire family of 5 kids OR splitting them up permanently between relatives, it was decided by my father, WITHOUT coercion from the Catholic priest or other relatives, to give Joan to two parents. And as for the adoptee whine that an adoptive couple could divorce and the child would be in a single parent home – NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THE FUTURE WILL BE – YOU MAKE DECISIONS ON THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES AND HOPE FOR THE BEST. THIS HAPPENS IN ALL-BIOLOGICAL FAMILIES TOO. ADOPTEES – GET OVER YOURSELVES).

On pg 251 is an example of neurotic sadomasochistic behavior, ‘…the growing bright spot was Mom. She lived in fear that I’d leave her again, but I reassured her that I wouldn’t. The pain of our recent past melted away as she lavished love on her only grandson.’ These two woman cannot live without each other. What is Joan going to do when Dorothy dies?

So she gains a copy of her adoption records and again reads into it what she wants it to be, not accepting it for what it actually is. She ‘learns a truth’ ‘…my natural father never signed a legal document that guaranteed him confidentiality, anonymity, or privacy. I noted that my adoptive parents weren’t required to stay away from my natural father. The only word of caution was to my natural father to not interfere with my life after adoption… the court document stated to refrain from doing or causing to be done any act or thing whatsoever which will in any way interfere with the rights, duties and privileges of said child when so adopted…’ 

Here are some important terms that Joan never has understood, to refrain from doing or causing to be done any act or thing whatsoever which will in any way interfere with the rights, duties and privileges of said child when so adopted…’ Gee, I remember that she did not refrain from doing or causing etc to my stepmother and father, when they were adopting, nor myself and my husband, when we were adopting. 

From Joan’s reasoning she believes ‘… that the interference and disruption is for the natural mother’s protection not the adopted child’s.’ She believes that ‘…secrecy and anonymity were forced on natural parents…because closed adoption was designed to protect the reputation of single mothers and their children from the stigma of illegitimacy and to protect adopting parents from interference…’ And then she goes on a rampage. ‘…I’m not illegitimate. Why was I punished…why this label and stigma… babies aren’t illegitimate…this is a fabrication of a puritanical society hell-bent on scapegoating mothers and their children’. Joan really has no concept of the ways of the real world.

Here’s a huge fact, everyone knows who the mother is; it is the father that is the questionable parent. Get with it! It has nothing to do with ‘…a fabrication of a puritanical society hell-bent on scapegoating mothers and their children’ as Joan rants about. It has everything to do with establishing parenthood for purposes of heritage and inheritance. If there is money, land, social standing, and many other things, knowing the father is key to everything and it is true in every culture, every religion, every time period, except perhaps in today’s decadent culture. Joan is very confused on the real purpose of marriage, it’s called a contract. When there are children within the marriage there are issues of legitimacy for the sake of heritage and inheritance. There are reasons that children born out of wed lock are called illegitimate, they are not entitled to the name and heritage of the father’s side of the family, that is the whole reason for marriage in the first place. There are many reasons that children are adopted, as there are many reasons why parents, on both side, natural and adoptive, stay away from each other and not interfere and there are reasons why adoption records are secret and protected. But Joan shall never get it!  What is Joan going to do with reality?

(Ruth’s note: Since Joan is in a perpetual state of denial regarding reality, she will wait until reality jumps up and bites her in the ass).

While Joan continues on with her struggles with adoption issues, her marriage having all the markings of eruption, she goes south to her husband. She sees that, without home or job, the real possibility that she will continue to be ‘…poor…but she didn’t want to live in a trailer park to become trailer trash…’ so she goes back to Buffalo while the husband flies back south to provide better for her and she is pregnant again. What Joan has never learned is ‘To know you have enough is to be rich’….Tao Te Ching. But she doesn’t know that so…What is Joan going to do! Pay back’s a bitch!

Ruth’s note: to dispel any confusion (or actually to add to the confusion), Joan’s adoptive mother Dorothy Wheeler uses two names: Doloris and Dorothy. We were introduced to her in 1974 as Dorothy. I always knew her by that name. When I found out years later that she also goes by Doloris, I asked Joan about that. Joan didn’t know why either.

As proof that Mrs. Wheeler goes by two names, I offer this screenshot, from public records, from Erie County.

off topic – Prayers offered for Japan March 11, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Dreams, Inconsistent Angel Things.
comments closed

Offer up your prayers and candles for Japan

Victims of the earthquake and tsunami

and for Mother Gaia

shukufuku
Japanese for “blessings” – wishing shukufuku for the Japanese people. One of my longtime dreams is to learn Japanese. This is a start.

a painting of Japanese chrysantemums, the symbol of the Imperial family of Japan

Evidence that Joan Wheeler has violated the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers March 10, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Gert McQueen and Ruth Pace

In my post  What is the REAL reason behind Joan Wheeler’s rant on the Huffington Post? on March 9, 2011, I said the following:

“Joan says she is a social worker. Ethical social workers do NOT tell things about their clients. I am not Joan’s client, but if I were, I’d sue the f’ing bitch for blabbing my confidentialities. And not even going by that, do you people not see her for the scumbag she is, that she hints in her book that she is holding “secrets” blackmail over her birth sisters? What kind of morals does Joan have that she threatens us in her book via emotional blackmail? And what kind of morals do readers of her book have and see nothing intrinsically wrong with a person who does that? “

 Gert then listed the Code of Ethics for Social Workers. Today, in this post, Gert lists the Code again, and outlines Joan’s past behaviors that show clearly how she has VIOLATED the Code of Ethics for Social Workers. Here is Gert’s post for today.

 On page 563 of Joan Wheeler’s book of lies, she quotes the codes 4.04 and 6.04 as her reasonings why social workers are wrong. Key words here are ‘her reasonings’, for Joan ALWAYS knows better than anyone, including an organization that has codes of ethics. Here are those codes (6.04 is the same as (b)

4.04 Dishonesty, Fraud, and Deception
Social workers should not participate in, condone, or be associated with dishonesty, fraud, or deception.

6.01 Social Welfare
(d) Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical disability.

Then she gives her own ‘recommendations’ to the social work profession for change! This is nothing short of an extension of her beating her own drum…nowhere has Joan submitted to the National Association of Social Workers for any changes! She is just mouthing off to the thin air…no one listens nor hears her.

But she believes that this book will be the avenue for major changes…and she ends with saying this: I demand restitution for my life as a person duped by adoption.’

What an asshole!! Since when are adoptees some kind of ‘group of people’ that gets ‘restitution’, like Native Americans. Not only is Joan an asshole she is a crazy one! The people that ought to get any form of restitution are her victims.

Now lets look at Joan Wheeler’s behavior. You readers judge for yourself as to whether or not Joan is in violation of ethics.

1.06 Conflicts of Interest
(b) Social workers should not take unfair advantage of any professional relationship or exploit others to further their personal, religious, political, or business interests.

Gert says: in the book there is evidence of Joan using her ‘profession’ to get a boy friend the ‘needed help’. The whole of the book is nothing but exploitation…of each and every member of both birth and adoptive family members. Joan’s main purpose for publishing the book was to EARN MONEY and get a movie deal! instead of getting a job. Sounds like exploitation to me.

1.12 Derogatory Language
Social workers should not use derogatory language in their written or verbal communications to or about clients. Social workers should use accurate and respectful language in all communications to and about clients.

Gert says: Well we have all seen Joan’s language…in the book, on her web site for the book and my gosh a whole web page dedicated to the use of derogatory language and descriptions of family members. Looks like a violation of this code!

4.02 Discrimination
Social workers should not practice, condone, facilitate, or collaborate with any form of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical disability.

Gert says: discrimination…Joan has provided many many episodes of such violations

4.03 Private Conduct
Social workers should not permit their private conduct to interfere with their ability to fulfill their professional responsibilities.

Gert says: Joan’s private conduct is such that she ought never to utter that she is a social worker. Her conduct, behavior and words show just how disgusting she is.

4.04 Dishonesty, Fraud, and Deception
Social workers should not participate in, condone, or be associated with dishonesty, fraud, or deception.

Gert says: Oh my…do I really have to tell about the dishonesty, fraud and deception that Joan has and is still doing?

4.05 Impairment 
(a) Social workers should not allow their own personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties to interfere with their professional judgment and performance or to jeopardize the best interests of people for whom they have a professional responsibility.

Gert says: Do you not see this violation Joan? Get yourself some major help and drop the social work angle…you are no good to anyone because you are a sick person!

(b) Social workers whose personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties interfere with their professional judgment and performance should immediately seek consultation and take appropriate remedial action by seeking professional help, making adjustments in workload, terminating practice, or taking any other steps necessary to protect clients and others.

Gert says: It says so right here…get help for yourself! But we all know that you won’t because you know better than anyone else! But you are in violation of this code.

4.06 Misrepresentation
(b) Social workers who speak on behalf of professional social work organizations should accurately represent the official and authorized positions of the organizations.

Gert says: and how does Joan Wheeler’s words and actions benefit the profession and organizations that she speaks for? Do you really want her to represent you?

6.01 Social Welfare
Social workers should promote the general welfare of society, from local to global levels, and the development of people, their communities, and their environments. Social workers should advocate for living conditions conducive to the fulfillment of basic human needs and should promote social, economic, political, and cultural values and institutions that are compatible with the realization of social justice.

Gert says: Joan would have to have a sense of conscience to fulfill this code. Joan is a low-life.

(d) Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical disability.

Gert says: Until Joan gets a life and alters her views she is in violation of these and many many others of the code of ethics. Not only has she been duping everyone she has duped herself. We all ought to be grateful that Joan can’t work due to her mental disabilities for if she did have a client that client would be in some serious trouble. It’s bad enough to be a family member with a unethical person like Joan in the family, exploiting them and lying about them!

emf press – Will Gert McQueen have a say in a book a bout adoption reunions? March 9, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
by Gert McQueen
The following was buried in my emails and in the interest of being open and above board…
 On December 16, 2010 I had sent a letter to EMK Press in Warren NJ regarding a submission that Joan Wheeler had presented to them. Here is what I said:

Publisher of EMK Press,

It is my understanding that you have received a submission, in October, from one Joan Wheeler for a book your publishing house is producing on adoption reunions. Joan Wheeler has published a book called Forbidden Family.

I am a birth sister to Joan Wheeler. I and other sisters, on a blog, are refuting that book because it is full of lies, misrepresentations and exaggerations of family members and others and is nothing more than a hateful rage against everyone in her life. Our blog is called, Refuting a book of Lies; Forbidden Family@ ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com. We also have a ‘book review’ of it on Amazon.com. I encourage you to look at them both before you accept and publish anything from Joan Wheeler.  

 ***

I then received a letter, on January 25, 2011, from LewEllen Singley…editor of EMK Press  

Here is what she said to me:

I wanted to let you know I received your letter concerning your birth-sister’s submission to our adoption reunion book. The book is still in production and want explore all aspects of reunion, not just for adoptees but the experiences of birth family too.

This book is not about pointing fingers but about the emotions that swirl during a reunion from all the sides. We hope the book can be used as a tool to create a healthy and successful reunion for everyone, that by seeing a different perspective than their own, readers can learn what it feels like to be on the other end of the emotions reunion brings.

Reunions aren’t always about happy endings; separation takes its toll on everyone. I’d like to respectfully ask you to share your story. Reunion is complex and I think your perspective could be valuable.

****

 And here is my response to her:

To LewEllen Singley

Thank you for your recent letter regarding my comments to your Press about publishing anything from Joan Wheeler, a birth sister that was placed in adoption.

I must point out, to you, that my reasons for informing you was so that you, and your publication, would have an opportunity to research and investigate the legitimacy of any statements from Joan Wheeler because, frankly she is a liar and anything she has to offer would not be of benefit to the book you feel ‘can be used as a tool to create a healthy and successful reunion’.

In your letter to me you state ‘This book is not about pointing fingers but about the emotions that swirl during a reunion from all the sides.’ Fine, but do you really want to publish the words of a liar? The adage ‘if the shoe fits’…fits here. Joan Wheeler’s book, Forbidden Family, is nothing but a long painful account of the author’s mental illness and her ‘mental impressions’ of what happened to her and not restricted to ‘reunion’.

Personally, I have no interests in any aspect of the adoption scene. All my ‘emotions that swirl’ from every second of ‘reunion’ with this adoptee has been nothing short of pain! My main concerns are that I am refuting and condemning a book that is full of lies, rage and hate by its author and restoring the honor to myself and my entire family from the hate and lies of 35 years by the united adoptee. But, your suggestion that my ‘perspective could be valuable’ is somewhat appealing. So, here is my perspective that you may publish, if you choose.

***

Reunion of birth siblings with adopted sibling; not for the faint of heart, you could be burnt.

Within a very short period of time after the adopted sibling was found, by birth sisters, the adopted sister began creating intense episodes of interference in birth family members’ affairs. Adopted sister would never accept a ‘no’ from any family member but inflicted her views and when not accepted, adopted sister retaliated in various forms of anti-social behavior to reunited birth family members.

My reunited adopted sister was, and still is, so against any form of adoption, that she thought it was her ‘right’ to get in between the adoption processes of others. The first was to interfere with the process of my father’s adoption of a stepchild. The second was to interfere with the process of my own adoption of my own child. When the reunited adopted sister was told to back off, it’s none of her business, the united adopted sister retaliated by causing major trouble.

In the case of my father (who was birth father to reunited adopted child) the reunited adoptive child began a campaign of projected internalized negativity toward every member of the united family because she could not accept the fact that the father that ‘gave her away’ was now ‘adopting’ another child. The reunited adopted sister saw everyone as ‘out to get her’.

In the case of myself, the reunited adopted sister, believed I was ‘harming’ my child by ‘adoption’ and when I told her to leave us alone, she proceeded to interfere in my parental authority with my minor children. I had to forbid the reunited adopted sister from having any contact with my minor children. In retaliation she called child abuse on me. That false case was quickly dismissed because I was already in an intense background check for the adoption proceedings. Shortly after that episode she called in a second false child abuse report on me, claiming sexual abuse, when one of my children ran-away after I moved my family away from reunited adopted sister. During that episode reunited adopted sister lied to family and police about the whereabouts of my minor child and eventually filed for custody of my child. After I placed my own child in protective custody, of the county, to keep her away from reunited adopted sister, I had a court hearing that proved I was innocent of all charges and the case was expunged. These events and the damage that resulted was 30 years ago, 1981 and 1982, but the reunited adopted sister, in her book that she published in 2009, lies and misrepresents everything and retells more lies about it. Why?

Because…‘she alone is the adoptee’ and the birth family members ‘harmed’ the adoptee and they must be exposed.

I attempted two reconciliatory attempts, in person in 1992 and a phone call around 2005. Both times the reunited adoptive sister smiled to my face and then betrayed me again. In 1992, by condemning my religion and calling my mental state into question to family members. In 2005, lead me to believe that she ‘loved me’ when indeed she thought I was ‘looking for information’. In her book, this united adopted sister fabricates outrages fantasies about these two events to prove ‘her’ belief that I am ‘out to get her’.

Since the publication of her book, in 2009, I have spoken out against it, because of the malicious hateful rages and lies within it and the need to restore my family’s honor that has been sullied by this book.

And I am only ONE member of the reunited family. Other birth family members have been accused, by the reunited adoptee, of various forms of harassment to the reunited adoptive sister, when in fact the family members were the victims of harassment and abuse by the reunited adopted sister. Reunited adopted sister, stole, from reunited birth family members, money, personal properties and reputations and then wrote a book of lies to victimized us all, again.

Moral of the story; know the background of the adoptive family that adopted the united adoptee and know how the adoptee was raised, before REUNION. For, even though you may be of the same blood, the adoptee is NOT a member of your family. Once adopted, by non-blood, the adoptee cannot relate with blood family members because they were NOT raised with them and therefore have not the same common backgrounds and mind sets. It was our family’s bad luck to have a reunion with someone who happens to be mentally impaired. Reunion, proceed at your own risk.

****

So LewEllen, you can publish my statement or not, doesn’t matter to me, I don’t care. All I care about is that this particular ‘reunited adopted sister’ caused severe damage, still is causing severe damage and certainly her story is not going to help your book to be ‘used as a tool to create a healthy and successful reunion’ because she is mentally unstable. Read her book and then tell me differently.   

So will I, Gert McQueen, have a say in a book about adoption reunions? And will I, Gert McQueen, share space in the same book with Joan Wheeler? Just think of the possibilities!!!

Gert says:

I have the snail mail and email addresses…any ONE interested please let me know. Anyone who has anything to say about adoption reunions with this particular adoptee, Joan Wheeler, is more than welcome to contact me or Ruth and we will help get you in contact to submit your story for this publication. Of course, I can’t guarantee acceptance, but at least you would have your say on YOUR experiences with this particular adoptee. I say…GO FOR IT. SAY WHAT YOU HAVE ALWAYS WANTED TO SAY TO JOAN WHEELER, AND SAY IT IN A BOOK!

Ruth’s comment:

I just might submit something myself!

What is the REAL reason behind Joan Wheeler’s rant on the Huffington Post? March 9, 2011

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

by Gert McQueen and Ruth Pace

This is the particular exchange that threw Joan Wheeler into a huff on the Huffington Post:

 Joan’s post:

Mrs Delacour,

I am not grateful to be adopted. Why would I? My adoptive parents knowingly and willingly prevented me from knowing my own full blood siblings during my childhood and that is child abuse. Yes, my natural father relinquish ­ed me to adoption when I was 4 months old just after the death of my mother. He kept the other 4 children. That alone is hurtful, but my adoptive parents knew my father and open visitation could have been arranged. But my so-called loving adoptive parents kept me all to themselves ­, alone, in their sheltered cocoon of adoption-l ­ove. I should have been told the truth.

Now about the birth certificat ­e issue: I was born the 5th child to married parents. My original birth certificat ­e states that there were 4 other children born to this mother. I was given a name and my long form birth certificat ­e states the date and time of birth in the hospital. My natural father gave this document to my adopting parents when he relinquish­ed me.

Gert’s comment

Child abuse!!??? Get a grip! Not knowing any blood siblings is NOT abuse, dear sister!

And you should not throw stones around so freely particular­ly when you have called two false abuse charges at me in the past, because you knew better! Wrong, you were wrong, then and you are wrong now.

There are reasons why in adoption you don’t get to know the blood family, and it certainly isn’t because anyone is doing any kind of abuse! That is only in your mind!

There were NOT such things as open adoption/v­isitation in your case, dear sister. You are beating a dead horse! It was not hurtful that you were placed in adoption and separate from the other four…the ­re was NO ONE to take care of YOU, dear sister…a ­nd you did NOT have the same fates that we had. And don’t even go there and blame that on adoption!

Why don’t you stop being so hateful to the people who gave you so much!! Who paid for your college education, that you don’t use? Your siblings didn’t have all the benefits that you had in adoption. Being grateful is one of the greatest gifts you could give yourself, but, you would rather stay poor and in hate.

Instead of hating adoption and everyone who adopts, why don’t you try living a life for a change.

Ruth’s comment:

So, a couple of days after this exchange, because we Sippel Sisters DARED to post an opinion on an internet site, Joan goes on a rampage and cuts and pastes stuff from her lying cyberbullying page. In an effort to “silence” us. Joan thinks she owns the internet. Joan can post things, but her birth sisters are NOT allowed to post. Too bad, Joan, you don’t own the internet, you don’t own Huffington Post, you couldn’t control your sisters, and you couldn’t control Huffington Post. Your arrogance got you kicked off!

So when Joan saw she couldn’t control us by preventing us from opening an account on Huffington and accessing our American Constitutional First Amendment Right to Free Speech, Joan decides that even her own cyberbullying crap wasn’t good enough. So she adds an additional slur against us – the bullshit about our grandfather molesting us when we were kids.

I have to hand it to Joan – she really needs to get a job writing for a soap opera. She’s good at the cliff hangers! In her book and on her website, she hints that she has “secrets” that her birth sisters don’t want her to tell. We have gone on this blog about a year ago and asked her what those secrets are. She has never responded, until now. So this is the SECRET! Are there any more secrets Joan? Come on, OUT WITH IT NOW! STOP BEATING AROUND THE BUSH. I’M CALLING IN YOUR BLUFF! I WANT TO SEE MORE DELUSIONS FROM YOUR SICK BRAIN SO I CAN HAVE ANOTHER GOOD LAUGH! I want to see some more of your “torpedos of  truth.” roflmao! You could give Charlie Sheen a run for his money. — got Tiger Blood? ha ha ha!

O my gosh, do you people see what a scumbag she is? Let’s suppose for one minute that her allegations are true. Joan says she is a “social worker.” Ethical social workers do NOT tell things about their clients. I am not Joan’s client, but if I were, I’d sue the f’ing bitch for blabbing my confidentialities. And not even going by that, do you people not see her for the scumbag she is, that she hints in her book that she is holding “secrets” blackmail over her birth sisters? What kind of morals does Joan have that she threatens us in her book via emotional blackmail? And what kind of morals do readers of her book have and see nothing intrinsically wrong with a person who does that? Do you think people who write the laws of America is going to listen to this whackjob and take her recommendations to change birth certificate access laws?  They are going to see her for what she is – a liar and someone who tries to hold her own birth family blackmail by threatening to tell lies and secrets about them. And then makes sick lying allegations about a very serious thing – child sexual abuse! Every adult survivor of child sexual abuse should slap Joan in the face for what she has lied about, for it makes a mockery of what they endured. NO ONE has the right to lie about something this serious.

 I say again Joan: OUT WITH IT! Because me and my sisters are not going to succumb to emotional blackmail by you. Whatever “hold” you think you have over us, forget about it. You have none. All you have is your lies. And now, for the FOURTH time, Joan, I am challenging you to a lie detector test.  Silence speaks volumes. She won’t answer me on this one because she knows the truth would stick in her throat and choke her.

So now I ask you Joan, WHO told you that I was molested by my grandfather? My grandfather? Let’s see, nope, he died in 1959. My grandmother? Nope, she died in 1965. Me? Nope, because I wouldn’t tell you about something that never happened. Was it my father? Nope, because again, it never happened. And speaking of my father, notice how Joan comes out with this bullshit AFTER my father is dead – because now my father can’t get in her face for her smearing his father’s reputation! Like he turned his back on her in 2009 for her insulting his religion and his mother.

 So getting back to Joan’s statement to Mrs. Delacour “I am not grateful to be adopted.”

 Well, shit, if the allegations against my grandfather were true, wouldn’t Joan BE grateful to have been adopted out and escape the alleged molestation?

No, I believe something else is going on here. And it is something that I have wondered about for years. Joan HATES men. She HATES my father for giving her up for adoption. She HATES her birth siblings that were NOT adopted. She HATES adoption. She HATES the fact she was adopted. She HATES her adoptive parents. She is so full of hate and rage. So full of hate and rage, and  disproportionally so.

WHY?

 Because  it was not the Sippel Sisters were sexually molested as children, I believe IT WAS JOAN WHEELER HERSELF WHO WAS SEXUALLY MOLESTED AS A CHILD, PROBABLY BY A WHEELER RELATIVE! 

Gert McQueen adds this comment:

Joan Wheeler says she is a Social Worker and as such she is bound by their codes of ethics. Well perhaps she ought to be brought up on charges of violation of the codes of ethics of Social Workers. Any takers? I think I might!!!
 
In part Ruth has said:

“Joan says she is a “social worker.” Ethical social workers do NOT tell things about their clients. I am not Joan’s client, but if I were, I’d sue the f’ing bitch for blabbing my confidentialities. And not even going by that, do you people not see her for the scumbag she is, that she hints in her book that she is holding “secrets” blackmail over her birth sisters? What kind of morals does Joan have that she threatens us in her book via emotional blackmail? And what kind of morals do readers of her book have and see nothing intrinsically wrong with a person who does that?”

 It just so happens that I have the ethic codes and what do they say?

The National Association of Social Workers codes of ethics.

1. SOCIAL WORKERS’ ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES TO CLIENTS

1.07 Privacy and Confidentiality

(a) Social workers should respect clients’ right to privacy. Social workers should not solicit private information from clients unless it is essential to providing services or conducting social work evaluation or research. Once private information is shared, standards of confidentiality apply.

(b) Social workers may disclose confidential information when appropriate with valid consent from a client or a person legally authorized to consent on behalf of a client.

(c) Social workers should protect the confidentiality of all information obtained in the course of professional service, except for compelling professional reasons. The general expectation that social workers will keep information confidential does not apply when disclosure is necessary to prevent serious, foreseeable, and imminent harm to a client or other identifiable person. In all instances, social workers should disclose the least amount of confidential information necessary to achieve the desired purpose; only information that is directly relevant to the purpose for which the disclosure is made should be revealed.

(d) Social workers should inform clients, to the extent possible, about the disclosure of confidential information and the potential consequences, when feasible before the disclosure is made. This applies whether social workers disclose confidential information on the basis of a legal requirement or client consent.

(h) Social workers should not disclose confidential information to third­party payers unless clients have authorized such disclosure.

(i) Social workers should not discuss confidential information in any setting unless privacy can be ensured. Social workers should not discuss confidential information in public or semipublic areas such as hallways, waiting rooms, elevators, and restaurants.

(q) Social workers should not disclose identifying information when discussing clients with consultants unless the client has consented to disclosure of confidential information or there is a compelling need for such disclosure.

(r) Social workers should protect the confidentiality of deceased clients consistent with the preceding standards.

 Gert says:

Sure looks like violation of the codes of ethics for the National Association of Social Workers to me! I say again, any takers? Anyone willing to press charges against Joan Wheeler for ethics violations? No takers? Well, I guess that’s the next thing I ought to look into!!

Is everyone’s truth really the truth? by Gert McQueen March 8, 2011

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
Is everyone’s truth really the truth?
by Gert McQueen
 
It was once believed that the sun rotated around the earth…that was fact! People died if they didn’t believe it.
 
If someone still believes that the sun rotates around the earth…are they still right? Is their truth…really true?
 
I have used the famous statement of the second president of the USA, John Adams, in a blog posting, to point out that a personal truth (Joan’s) is not really the truth. John Adams said “Facts are Stubborn Things”.
 
Joan NEVER provides facts! Her truth is not the truth!
 
Daniel Patrick Moynihan said “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
This was said in response to someone who said that President Obama is not a citizen of the USA.
 
It has been said to me, by a friend, that if someone believes something it is truth to them. Okay!
We all know perfectly acceptable examples of such. But, there are beliefs and opinions and then there are FACTS. And Joan Wheeler does not have the facts. All she can do is scream her hate and venom against the very people, her blood sisters, who are DEFENDING themselves against her continued lying and slanderish statements that she put in a book in the first place.
 
It is a FACT that Joan wrote a book of lies and we sisters are DEFENDING ourselves, everywhere we can. If Joan doesn’t like that, she knows what she can do about it. Give up the book and all statements against the birth family and/or take us to court!
 
I for one would really relish seeing the FACTS that Joan has to prove her statements. It’s way past the time for Joan to shit…bring out her facts…or get off the pot…her campaign against us.  
 
We are not done yet Joan…do you  have the strength to keep up the fight for your truth! We do, we have the facts to support our statements and therefore I say again…Facts are Stubborn Things.
 
“Nobody can acquire honor by doing what is wrong.”

–Thomas Jefferson

To Joan Wheeler, from Ruth Sippel – drop dead March 8, 2011

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

A personal message to Joan Wheeler

Are you proud of yourself? Your latest low-down rotten slur against your blood kin shows not only us, but the entire world what a low life you are.

Blabbing on the internet a suppposed sexual molestation – you have the nerve to first accuse my grandfather of this heinous deed, which is completely FALSE!

And what if is was true? what kind of f’ing sleaze goes on the internet and blabs that?

Guess what readers? There is a person, close to Joan Wheeler, who at the age of 3, was sexually molested. And I KNOW it is true, because at the time, I was close to this young person. I will NOT blab who it was, or who did it. Why not? Because I have more class than Joan Wheeler.

We Three Sippel Sisters do not like Joan, not because we are jealous of her, or any other kind of delusional thought patterns that Joan may think of – We hate her because of her continual acts of hate towards us – we have been using this blog to chronicle her rotten deeds to us, and this act is another example of how Joan treats us. We, as human beings, do not deserve to be treated like this. Who the hell does Joan think she is? Well, she’s getting slapped down now, and slapped down hard. Because she doesn’t act like a normal human being. She acts like a f’ing moron. Only a moron goes on the internet and spreads shit like this.

Joan does not owe us an apology however, she owes an apology to all the adult survivors of child sexual abuse – yes, because when Joan posted what she did, merely as a ploy to hurt us, she made a mockery of this heinous act. And she needs to be deeply ashamed of herself. Because of the person who I alluded to above. I wonder how Joan could look at that person in the eye after making a mockery of what that person went through. And all other child sexual abuse victims – Joan is an asshole! She will burn in hell for this.

Let her run to her adoptee buddies at the Adult Adoptee forum and say some lies about us now. But she can’t weasel her way out of this one.

Joan Wheeler – DROP DEAD!

aha – we have the evidence and now everyone can see what a lying filthy snake Joan Wheeler is. March 7, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Black and White Evidence of Joan Wheeler's Lies: Letters, Court Documents, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

aha – we have the evidence and now everyone can see what a lying filthy snake Joan Wheeler is.

by Ruth Sippel Pace

This was just sent to me via email, the entire exchange and what Joan Wheeler said on the Huffington Post. She continues with her lies that she had multiple orders of protection against me, when in reality she only ONE. In her delusional mind, and her diarrhea of the mouth, ONE equals MANY. (was she never taught arithmetic?) Also for your consideration is the outlandish and disgusting lie about my grandfather. Joan has now taken the Angry Adoptee too fucking far and shows the world what a BITCH she really is. And this is going to help adoption reform? No! Rational people in congress and supreme court will NOT look at the rantings and ravings of such an irrational delusional liar as Joan Wheeler. For the love of god Joan, SHUT THE F UP!

Joan M Wheeler

Member Since October 2010
Comments (15) | Friends (46)
Joan M Wheeler’s Comments

View Comments: All News Only Blog Only Pending Only   Sort: Newest First Oldest First HuffPost Pick First
huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:43:37 in Living

“How do you get a “full refund” on an adoption? I know adoptees who have had their names cahnged back to the names they were given at birth. That is their right to do so in adulthood. They are re-claimii­ng what was taken from them.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:32:42 in Health

“To Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine Sippel Inglis, Gertrude Sippel McQueen

You can search my names on Google, read every comment and post I ever wrote, send follow-up comment postings and email to instigate and aggravate me. You don’t want me in your life so stay out of mine.

You are a destructiv­e force in the goals that I, and other adoption reformers, want to achieve.

I have gone to the police repeatedly to try to stop you. Orders of Protection only work for six months or one year, then, you are back again. New York State does not have Internet Bullying Laws. If New York did have these laws, I would have all three of my sisters arrested and convicted for causing me emotional and financial distress.

My three sisters do prove my point that separating siblings, especially after the death of a parent during childhood, damages the children who bring their mental anguish into adulthood.

My siblings have been inflicting their sick perversion­s and twisted obsessions upon me and my children and my adoptive mother since 1974. It appears that they will continue this right into old age and death. That is how mentally sick they are.

http://cyb­erbulliess­talkers.bl­ogspot.com­/

For adoption reform: http://for­biddenfami­ly.com

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:21:24 in Living

“Since my three sisters do not want me in their lives and I don’t want them in mine, why don’t they leave me alone? I am not bothering them by doing my adoption reform activism. They are dragging themselves and their drama back into my life, time and time again. I am tired of defending myself against their personal attacks on me. In their blogs, they call for me to commit suicide. They say that I desecrated our father’s memorial book.. How? By writing my name in it? He is my father and I am his daugher. I have every right to sign his memorial book at the funeral parlor that nobody wanted me at. I get it. they don’t want me. I don’t want them either. But I am entitled to do adoption reform advocacy because I have been doing this since they found me in 1974. Why they have to continue to invade my life, I do not know. They are hateful people who won’t leave me alone.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:15:12 in Living

“My second oldest sister, Kathy, not only invited me to her home, twice, in Liverpool, England (1976 and 1979), but on the second trip there she yelled at me that I “was not her sister” and that she “did not want me there”. She arranged for me to stay in a neighbor’s apartment down the hall. Apparently­, she could not stand the site of me because I “reminded her of THEM” and she did not want to have that horrible memory of the family she left behind in Buffalo, New York, USA. Also, she and her married, rich and famous boyfriend wanted a threesome with me, which I refused. In 1989, Kathy again invited me to Liverpool, but on the night before I was to leave she called me and told me to stay home, saying that my visit would “ruin everything­” for her. Because Kathy badmouthed me to our friends in Liverpool, I lost these people as my friends. I have not spoken to her since, yet she reads my blog constantly and has her own blog to discredit me.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:14:21 in Living

“My eldest sister, Gert, sexually molested me repeatedly during the first years of our reunion. No, this was not Genetic Sexual Attraction (as known in adoption psychology­) this was initiated by drug and alcohol to intoxicate and to seduce me. She said it was “a way to get back to Momma”. So my eldest sister had her own idea of sex with me as she missed our dead mother and used me to that end. This first occurred when I was 20 years old and continued for about two years, which was two years after being found by this sister. It does not matter that I was “old enough to know better” because I was vulnerable from being found and having to deal with reunion and betrayal of my adoptive parents at that stage of young adulthood. Additional­ly, my eldest sister was 29 years old at the time and in a position of authority over me (eldest sister to youngest sister). Keep in mind that I was raised an only child, too, and had no counselor or therapist to help me.
Fact is that is that my older sisters were molested by our grandfathe­r and they think I escaped by being adopted. So they blame me for being an adoption activist. They were not adopted, I was, and they weasel into my life every chance they get.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:09:53 in Living

“The sister closest in age to me, the fourth youngest sibling, Ruth, has violated my wishes to be left alone as recently as Nov 2009 when she asked our father for my unlisted phone number, which he gave her against my wishes. I had to change my phone number yet again to retain my privacy. Over many years, Ruth has written numerous pieces of hate mail to me, most of which were burned. However, Ruth still sent hateful and obscene letters to me. Ruth has had a fixation against me for decades. She believes I slept with her then-boyfr­iend-now-h­usband (no I did not) and called Child Abuse on me and my 80 year old adoptive mother because she claims I had sex with her man in front of my children and my mother watched, too. This formal accusation took place in 1996, caused disruption for my children, my adoptive mother and I, dragged us through months of court appearance­s. Ruth has showed up at my home in violation of several Orders of Protection that I had against her since the 1980s.

I filed for yet another Order of Protection in 2005, after yet more unwanted contact. Charges were dismissed because the judge was tired of it all. Since I cannot get the police to help me, nor a court of law to defend me, and I cannot reason with any of my three full blood sisters. I want to be left alone.”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Mar 4, 2011 at 17:57:15

“this is the kind of garbage lies that JW posts on the internet about me. She says here she had orderS of protection­against me since the 1980’s, wrong, the only order of protection she ever got against me was in 1993.
http://rut­hsippelpac­e.wordpres­s.com/cate­gory/black­-and-white­-evidence-­of-joan-wh­eelers-lie­s-letters-­court-docu­ments/
If any one is interested in the TRUTH, these posts on my blog, contain scanned actual court documents that PROVE that what JW says here, March 4, 2011 is LIES and again is SLANDERING me and my sisters.
I, Ruth Sippel Pace maintain my right to answer JW’s smearing of MY reputation­.
If Joan wants to silence me on the internet the solution is obvious: JW needs to stop spreading false accusation­s about me and my sisters.”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 16:04:13 in Living

“My blood kin sisters have recently banned together to write their own blogs spreading filthy lies about me, saying that I am actively harming them by bullying them. I am not. Just because they say I am does not mean their statements are true. They are doing this all themselves­. They let the world know they were in the book because they identified themselves­. They are the ones bashing me. As instructed by the police and by WordPress and by my own website’s tech support, I have written a blog calling for my sisters to Cease and Desist their cruel behavior (even calling for me to kill myself). Please see the following blog for my statements defending myself: http://cyb­erbulliess­talkers.bl­ogspot.com­/.

There are no cyberbully­ing laws in New York State so I cannot call law enforcemen­t for protection­. I have been the victim of harassment and bullying from my three sisters for many decades. They have taken disagreeme­nts to the extreme.

I have no contact whatsoever with the three sisters who found me. They are mean and unstable people. I want only positive and loving people in my life. My sisters have caused a great deal of torment in my life, but they are not the focus of my reunion nor my life. I, alone, am the adoptee. My book is about my life and how adoption effected me and my immediate adoptive family, my now ex-husband­, and our children.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 14:39:07 in Health

“Ruth has no business in my life now. We have had no relationsh­ip for over 3 decades. I am being stalked and bullied by my three older natural blood sisters. I want them out of my life but they keep ttrailing after me.

About my adoption: Our mother died when I was three months old. Our father placed me with my adopting parents one month later and I was legally adopted at age 1 year and 1 week. There facts are documented in my adoption papers which I petitioned for legally.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 4, 2011 at 11:29:45 in Health

“Dana Seilhan said: “We wouldn’t need birth certificat­­e access legislatio­­n if we’d quit changing birth certificat­­es to begin with.”

Exactly. So why don’t we start legislatio­n across the USA to stop this practice? Someone has to put a stop to it. Access legislatio­n makes no sense when the cycle is not broken. Stop producing false birth certificat­es, start producing truthful adoption certificat­es, and we will eventually see that there is no need for sealed records. So, where’s the new legislatio­n to end the cycle? Get on it!!!”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:59:47 in Health

“Mres Delacour says: “Why then would you deny my right not to share with my adult children? They don’t need to know they were adopted – they don’t need to be as angry as you all are.”

Keeping secrets as deep as the true identity of your adoptee is surely indicative of a controling and insecure adoptive parent. You don’t need to be so possessive and afraid if you parented your adoptee with love. But I see that you are angry and paranoid. You did adopt someone else’s child and for that, you have evvery obligation to tell the truth: morally, ethically, religiousl­y, and legally. To base any relationsh­ip on lies is a set-up for disaster and pain. I feel sorry for you and your husband and your adoptee. You truley are ignorant of life-cycle adoption psychology­. Shame on you. As an adoptive parent you owe it to yourself to read Nancy Verrier’s books on what the adoptee experience­s. This isn’t about you, this is about the adoptee!”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:51:18 in Health

“part 2 to Mrs Delacour:

My amended birth certificat­e states all the birth facts: date and time of birth, and hospital, but I am re-named as if I were born with that name, and my adoptive mother is named as having given me birth. That is an outright lie! The one birth fact left off of my falsified birth certificat­e is that there were 4 other children born to the real mother. But I am forced to present this document as proof of my birth. I resent it.

In addition to giving back a civil right to own our original birth certificat­es, I would like to see the eliminatio­n of the amended birth certificat­e as an automatic dictate upon adoption. Instead, replace the amended and falsified birth certificat­e with an adoption certificat­e which states the facts of adoption. Leave the birth certificat­e alone and open to the adoptee. The adoption certificat­e should be open, too. This is the way it is done in more progressiv­e countries such as The Netherland­s and Australia.”

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

A Healthy Reminder: Adopted People Are Americans Too

Commented Mar 3, 2011 at 12:50:23 in Health

“Mrs Delacour,

I am not grateful to be adopted. Why would I? My adoptive parents knowingly and willingly prevented me from knowing my own full blood siblings during my childhood and that is child abuse. Yes, my natural father relinquish­ed me to adoption when I was 4 months old just after the death of my mother. He kept the other 4 children. That alone is hurtful, but my adoptive parents knew my father and open visitation could have been arranged. But my so-called loving adoptive parents kept me all to themselves­, alone, in their sheltered cocoon of adoption-l­ove. I should have been told the truth.

Now about the birth certificat­e issue: I was born the 5th child to married parents. My original birth certificat­e states that there were 4 other children born to this mother. I was given a name and my long form birth certificat­e states the date and time of birth in the hospital. My natural father gave this document to my adopting parents when he relinquish­ed me.

(end of part 1)”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Mar 4, 2011 at 14:20:35

“First, the reason JW was adopted was because my dad had to go to work and there was no one to take care of her. Would JW have liked to have lain in a crib unattended for up to 9 hours a day? THAT is child abuse and neglect. She was adopted by people who could take care of her 24/7.

Second, JW states “I should have been told the truth.” JW should begin by telling the truth in all posts on the internet. She was not 4 months old when she was adopted, but 3 months.”

Miss Morgan B Aird on Mar 3, 2011 at 17:35:48

“It is unfortunat­e, Joan, you feel not knowing your biological siblings is child abuse, but it’s statistica­lly proven that it’s not the healthiest thing (psycholog­ically) for a child. Yes, your adoptive parents should have told you about your biological family & no let it be a “hush/tabo­o” thing to talk about, but think of it like this… imagine meeting your family and going home, you wonder: “Why did he keep them and not me? Am I not good enough? Why does my dad not want to take care of me?” all at the age of 5 or 13. We both know that’s something you would not wish on any child, especially during the time in which you are trying to find and define yourself. All your adoptive parents did was love you like your biological family obviously couldn’t. You could have been in the foster care system or killed and put in the garbage like other innocent children who don’t have as loving and considerat­e people as both sets of parents.
You were blessed to be adopted, regardless of how you feel now. I do not know anything about my biological parents and it isn’t until now (26 years later) my adoptive mom wants to seriously talk,other than when I was a child. I have a biological brother that is only 16 months older than me (which she kept), but I love both my parents just the same, because I am here and I am wonderful!”

Wallet Missing For 40 Years Found In NY Crevice

Wallet Missing For 40 Years Found In NY Crevice

Commented Feb 22, 2011 at 11:31:59 in New York

““A Wallet Stolen and Returned, A Birth Certificat­e Stolen, Both Have Sentimenta­l Value”

A wallet stolen 40 years ago and returned to the rightful owner certainly has sentimenta­l value. The person who found the wallet felt “fantastic satisfacti­on” by giving back the wallet after all these years.

But what of adoptees who have had their identities at birth stolen from them? Shouldn’t they be the beneficiar­ies of a society who now realizes the tremendous sentimenta­l value of obtaining one’s own birth certificat­e? Currently, New York and New Jersey are preventing millions of adoptees from accessing their sealed original birth certificat­es by refusing to pass legislatio­n that would reunite adoptees with their original birth certificat­es.

Give adoptees back their civil rights to the truth of their births. Change the law. Let’s make human interest stories out of the positive outcomes that would result from reuniting an adoptee with the true certificat­e that documents the day they were born.

Joan Wheeler born Doris Sippel”

huffingtonpost entry

Abducted Versus Adopted: For 1.5 Million of U.S. Adoptees, What’s the Difference?

Commented Feb 11, 2011 at 10:44:53 in Living

“My natural father legally relinquish­ed me to adoption in 1956. He willingly set for the separation of his five children, but inn what was handled as a closed adoption back then, could have easily been guardiansh­ip or even open adoption as it was an open placement. Both sets of parents knew each other and my adoptive parents knew that I had sisters and a brother. What turned my adoption into what I feel like – an abduction – is that my adoptive parents intentiona­lly prevented me contact. I was raised an only child and for no good reason. We could have had a childhood together, but the adults involved and the courts that ruled that I should be forever kept away, hidden in the suburbs, while my siblings lived six miles away. This was cruelty to five children. My four older sibs searched for and found me at my age of 18. I was in total shock being found at that young age. I never fully regained composure from that shock, realizing that the parents who raised me never wanted me to know the truth. It hurts to be treated as a possession­. To be treated with disrespect­, to be held captive as their only daughter when they knew I had sisters and a brother…­The wasted years and the reunion turned sour. We lost so much of life and couldn’t maintain relationsh­ips. Adoption is a cruelty that should not be. Guardiansh­ip and family preservati­on should have been set up.”

Gert McQueen on Feb 14, 2011 at 09:24:12

“It was said: Actually, I was talking about the obvious pain of all 3 of these women.

The recent ‘pain’ is because of the lying book that Joan wrote about all family members and non-member­s in her quest for laying the blame of her miserable life on the doorstep of adoption.

I divorced myself from this woman back in 1982 because of what she did to my family, because I ‘adopted’ my own son and she didn’t like that and my telling her to leave me and my family alone. Ten years later, I attempted a reconcilat­ion, in person, she again betrayed me, attacking my mental health and religion and then another attempt by me by phone in 2005 again was met with more betrayal, she thought I was looking for informatio­n to ‘get her’.

I am in no pain…Joa­n is…becau­se she can not stop the truth, that we sisters are saying, on our blog. If the truth hurts, it is not my family that is hurting, only Joan because she refuses to accept the truth of the life that she was given.”

Ruth Herr Sippel Pace on Feb 12, 2011 at 16:34:56

“I am Ruth Pace, a natural sibling of Ms. Wheeler. Ms. Wheeler is entitled to her own opinions, however misguided on being “abducted.­” But in reality, she was LEGALLY adopted after our mother died, leaving behind a 3 month infant (Joan) and 4 other small children. My father was himself an only child, his parents were elderly, our mother’s siblings also were unable to take in a whole family of 5. Therefore the decision was made to give Joan to 2 parents who could properly care for an infant. My father did NOT “willingly­” separate us. He did what needed to be done. Would Joan liked to have laid unattended in a crib for up to 10 hours a day as an infant? Ms. Wheeler just will NOT accept that in the 50’s there were no day care centers, or welfare system like today, and my father had NO CHOICE.. Ms. Wheeler has also written a book filled with misreprese­ntations such as this about my father, along with many out and out lies.
My sister and I have a blog refuting Ms. Wheeler’s book at http://rut­hsippelpac­e.wordpres­s.com/ where we tell WHY our reunion went sour.”

Gert McQueen on Feb 12, 2011 at 10:13:36

“I’m Gert McQueen a birth sister to Joan Wheeler, See my blog ‘Refuting a Book of Lies; Forbidden Family’ @ ruthsippel­pace.wordp­ress.com Our purpose is truth telling.

The truth about Joan’s book is that is is an extremely long painful account of the author’s own perception­s of her reality where in she fabricates­, exaggerate­s and boldly lies about people and events. She describes her own character flaws presenting them as reasons for why she believes she has been traumatize­d by adoption and in that process doesn’t realize the harm she has done to herself and others. She portrays both the birth and adoptive families is very negative ways and claims to be harassed by us birth sisters. She does not tell of her own negative actions towards the birth sisters or many other people. The author is violently opposed to adoption and adoptive parents and is not truly interested in helping people,

My sisters and I are not hiding anything we say or do about refuting her book or other actions she has said or done to us; we put everything we do on our blog for it is a truth-tell­ing blog. It is the birth sisters’ position that the fact of a publicatio­n of a book of lies and misreprese­ntation is an grave dishonor to our parents, ourselves and other members of our family and the adoptive family.”

huffingtonpost entry

Miracles, the Brain and Adoption

Commented Oct 6, 2010 at 13:03:52 in Living

“This article was very helpful to me as I am both an adoptee and a premie. I was born at 32 weeks, was kept in an incubator for 6 weeks after birth, and it is not clear to me if my mother of father were allowed to visit me. Since my mother was dying, she was bedridden, and I was told she was “shown” me a few times. It is not clear if my mother had nursed me at all.

The primal wound is very much a part of my life, longing for closeness that was taken from me so soon after birth because I almost died and had to be kept in medical isolation to bring up my weight and physical developmen­t. Soon after I was released from the hosptial, my mother died, which led to my relinquish­ment and adoption.

Thank you for your article.

However, I would hardly call adoption “wonderful­”: “Adoption is a wonderful way to start and have a family.” Be careful. Adoption as practiced in America is filled with destructio­n. If adoptive parents would truely be open and honest with their adoptee (mine were not) and adoptees’ the birth certificat­e are not sealed and falsified, and if connection­s with the family of origin are not severed…­then adoption would become guardiansh­ip. Ever here of family preservati­on?

I am for total and complete adoption prevention­.
Joan M Wheeler born Doris M Sippel
http://for­biddenfami­ly.com

Badges (Learn more)
Networker
Superuser
Moderator

Stats Board

Network

Friends 

Joan Wheeler: you are a disgusting piece of shit after what you said on the Huffington Post March 7, 2011

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

by Ruth Sippel Pace

So this idiotic neurotic nutball has the nerve to say on the internet that her birth sisters were sexually molested by their grandfather. What a lowdown bitch she is.

First, this never happened. Joan keeps scraping the bottom of her filthy black heart to come up with lies to use against her birth sisters.

Second, even if it were true, how would you dare to post this – what a filthy bitch Joan is – this is called exploitation of a rape victim, and is the lowest a person could go in a smear campaign.

Yes, what Joan did is to try to exploit a rape victim, even if the event never happened, it is Joan’s INTENT –  she wanted to hurt us. Why would anyone want to try to hurt another human being in this fashion? – Joan has no morals. And she proves it when she wrote another filthy lie about her birth family in her continual smear campaign against her birth sisters and true to her ELDER ABUSING character, she sullies the character of my elderly grandfather, a man who having died 52 years ago, is no longer around to defend himself.

What kind of immoral bitch are you Joan? Please take your delusions and shove them.

Adoption reformers: take a good look at Joan Mary Wheeler. do you like what you see?

Gert McQueen answers the latest lowdown slandering of the Sippel Sisters done by Joan Wheeler March 7, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, mental illness, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
(Joan’s posts in blue, Gert’s are in green)
Gert McQueen:
Well I guess I missed something in all the excitement on the Huff site…
 
Joan said:
Fact is that is that my older sisters were molested by our grandfathe ­r and they think I escaped by being adopted. So they blame me for being an adoption activist. They were not adopted, I was, and they weasel into my life every chance they get.”
 
This woman is so out to lunch, she obviously doesn’t have a clue about anything anymore. How does Joan know anything as FACT in relationship to the blood family? She is kidding herself, she knows nothing. She added this section, as another thought, as she was in the middle of writing her rantings on the Huffington site. This shows that she is beginning to crack up, BIG TIME. She was in the middle of a cut and paste job from her cyberbullying page rant against us AND she got carried away and added this new comment against what Ruth and I were writing. She had to make her case against us as more and more outlandish.
 
Doesn’t she see that people SEE the insanity in what she writes? Of course NOT, she is mentally ill.
 
To state such a ‘fact’, even if it were true, is to show what bad taste and low life Joan really is. And then to add more fantasies that, she ‘escaped’ molestation by adoption and that is why we hate her.
 
Fact, for what she is talking about….it didn’t happened! What an outrageous statement to say! Not only is it untrue, but it is so ‘below the belt’ that it has no shred of decency to it. Joan is so sick she has lost all sense of decency. She thinks she can hurt us with all these lies but in reality she is HURTING herself. People read what she writes and they want to get as far away from her as possible.
 
Let’s talk about ‘weasel’ ing into another life. It was Joan that weaseled herself into our lives, not the other way around. Joan seems to have forgotten her book were she details how and why she interfered in all of our lives. But fear not, we will shall be getting OUR SIDE OF THE STORY out there.
 
Why the hell would I want to be in Joan’s life? It is only because she refuses to get OUT of our lives that we are speaking out against her. If she didn’t want us in her life why did she write about us…did she think we would be happy with what she had to say?
 
 Get rid of that book Joan and we will be out of your life. I don’t care about your activist activity with adoption, I care about your damn lies…

Drama Button – to highlight Joan Wheeler’s obviously sick rantings March 7, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Dreams, Inconsistent Angel Things, Having Fun with Disfunctionality, mental illness.
Tags:
comments closed

Drama Button.

the following didn’t show up as I had hoped. but it’s a cute little game. Perhaps Joan should play it and get her f’ing frustrations of  life out in a healthy way instead of putting slanderous and filthy lies about her birth sisters all over the internet

<table border=”2″ cellpadding=”5″ cellspacing=”45″ bordercolor=”#8FB2CE” background=”http://virtual-bubblewrap.com/images/bubblebadgebg.jpg” bgcolor=”#FFFFFF”><tr> <td valign=”middle” bgcolor=”#FFFFFF”><p align=”center”><font color=”#FF0000″><b>I pop bubble wrap at 1.80 bubbles per second!</b></font></p> <p align=”center”><font color=”#0033CC”>I popped 196 bubbles in 1 minute and 48.8 seconds<br /> at <a href=”www.Virtual-Bubblewrap.com!http://www.virtual-bubblewrap.com”><b>www.Virtual-Bubblewrap.com</b></a&gt;!<br />Can you beat my score?</font></p></td></tr></table>

Adoption Reformers, do you know what kind of person Joan Wheeler really is? March 6, 2011

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
Today, March 6, 2011 I posted the following on Huffington Post. I don’t know if it will get posted. People in the adoption reform world need to know just what kind of person Joan Mary Wheeler really is. An unstable person, a liar, and an abuser who will say anything to sully her birth sisters.
This comment is pending approval and won’t be displayed until it is approved.

On March 4, Joan Wheeler came on this site and further slandered me and my family saying falsehoods­. especially offensive was the accusation that my grandfathe­r molested me. Joan also threatened to call the police on me. I apologize that a family feud is bandyied about but Joan made it public by selfpublis­hing a book containing these and other filthy lies about me. She is not a person who should be representi­ng good people who are trying to reform adoption laws.
On my blog at http://rut­hsippelpac­e.wordpres­s.com/ I posted this statement:

CALL THE COPS! LET’S SEE YOU ANSWER TO YOUR FILTHY LIES ABOUT MY GRANDFATHE­R!

I, Ruth Sippel Pace, do state and affirm, that my grandfathe­r NEVER molested me. AND I WILL TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST TO THIS.

I HAVE CHALLENGED JOAN MARY WHEELER TWICE BEFORE ON THIS BLOG TO TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST – SHE HAS NEVER RESPONDED.­THIS IS THE THIRD TIME JOAN – WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU AFRAID OF? THE TRUTH? DAM RIGHT SHE IS!

GO AHEAD JOAN – WE ARE CALLING YOUR BLUFF RIGHT NOW – CALL THE COPS AND SET UP THE POLYGRAPH!­!!

SEE YOU AT THE POLYGRAPH OFFICE MS. JOAN MARY WHEELER!

Joan Wheeler’s comments from the Huffington Post that proves she slanders her birth sisters on the internet March 5, 2011

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Announcements and updates, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Ruth Pace and Gert MccQueen

On March 5, 2011, Joan Wheeler and I had a little exchange on The Huffington Post website. I have already posted about that in my post here . Joan chose to start the insults and mudslinging again. She copied and pasted crap from her lying cyberbulling website, slandering  us again. Gert McQueen and I, have posted on the site, and NOT our sister Kathy. But Joan, who seems to think that the Three Sippel Sisters are one entity, not only slanders me and Gert, but Kathy as well. Kathy has done nothing. Kathy has not posted to the Huffington Post website, and as far as I know, has not even gone there to read any of the stuff. But Joan in her mudslinging doesn’t care – and true to her snotty character, falsely accuses Kathy of bothering her.

I must first point out that when we see Joan post on the internet, if it is strictly about her work in the adoption reform field, we respect that. We do NOT comment. HOWEVER, if Joan posts about us or our family, we DO speak up, because usually when she writes about her birth family it is a bunch of lies. And it is not neccessary to speak about her birth family when she writes about her adoption reform issues. It is only neccessary to speak of us in generalities. As a matter fact, since she was adopted in 1957, and she was reunited with us in 1974, she has no business at all writing about her birth family’s lives from 1957 to 1974, as she was not there, and events in my life, my sisters’ lives, and the rest of our family’s lives have no bearing on her adoption, her adoption reform work, or her at all. And when Joan posts about me or my family, I have the right to know what is being said about me and my family. And since she is posting about us, we have the right to answer it.

In response to Joan’s comments on the Huffington site, Gert posted one comment, and I posted several. I was disgusted by Joan’s continual slanderous attacks on me and my sisters, so I flagged Joan’s comments this morning. I flagged them as offensive, because they were. Joan was once again spreading lies about me and my sisters.

This afternoon, around 1:30 pm, Gert wrote another comment in response to Joan’s lies. Comments posted are saved until approved by a moderator. Gert had the good sense to copy and paste not only her pending comment, but Joan’s previous comments. Ten minutes later, the moderators at Huffington Post pulled all of Joan’s slanderous comments. With them, all answering comments were also deleted. I was copying and pasting my comments on notepad, but accidentally deleted them. But we have at least one exchange that Gert had saved and sent it to me via email, to post here. To show our blog readers what kind of a snake Joan is.

To sum up what happened – Joan commented on adoption, which is fine by me, BUT then she mentions my family again. Joan had said that she was adopted at the age of 4 months. I answered her and corrected her and said she was adopted at the age of 3 months. But I was wrong – it was indeed 4 months. Joan answered and corrected me. Fair enough. HOWEVER, Joan, with her diarrhea of the mouth (and fingers on the keyboard) began to slander me again. AND my sisters. She then said that she has had no relationship with us for over 3 decades. Well, I answered back and corrected her that 3 decades, 30 years, takes us back to 1981, and I was a bridesmaid of hers in 1983. I told her stop lying. Joan of course, can’t stand to be corrected, and launched into a full scale assault on us again. I countered with the truth, which Joan cannot stand, so she posted her offensive shit again.

Because these things have been deleted, no one can see them. Except for a couple of them, right here. Now you can see how Joan goes on other internet sites and attacks us and slanders us.

Here is Gert’s email to me, in it’s entirety, except for email addresses removed.  Joan’s original posts are in blue. Gert’s posts are in green.

From: ger@   Subject: saturdays’ posts
To: ruth –
CC: ger  –

here’s what I wrote that didn’t get on….I say…use this on the blog….show people how she goes after us and how we defend ourselves and even tho we got kicked off the Huff, so did Joan…but unlike Joan we will put it up on the blog
  
To Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine Sippel Inglis, Gertrude Sippel McQueen

You can search my names on Google, read every comment and post I ever wrote, send follow-up comment postings and email to instigate and aggravate me. You don’t want me in your life so stay out of mine.

You are a destructiv ­e force in the goals that I, and other adoption reformers, want to achieve.

I have gone to the police repeatedly to try to stop you. Orders of Protection only work for six months or one year, then, you are back again. New York State does not have Internet Bullying Laws. If New York did have these laws, I would have all three of my sisters arrested and convicted for causing me emotional and financial distress.

My three sisters do prove my point that separating siblings, especially after the death of a parent during childhood, damages the children who bring their mental anguish into adulthood.

My siblings have been inflicting their sick perversion ­s and twisted obsessions upon me and my children and my adoptive mother since 1974. It appears that they will continue this right into old age and death. That is how mentally sick they are.

http://cyb ­erbulliess ­talkers.bl ­ogspot.com ­/

For adoption reform: http://for ­biddenfami ­ly.com

Joan_M_Wheeler: To Ruth Sippel Pace, Katherine Sippel Inglis, Gertrude Sippel McQueen

Permalink  | Share it

Gert McQueen   0 minute ago (1:03 PM)
This comment is pending approval and won’t be displayed until it is approved.

Joan needs to remove Kathy’s name, she has NOTHING to do with this posting!
Joan needs to remember that she is slandering and saying many false statements here against us and we will take action if she does not stop.
Joan needs to STOP because she will be hearing from my attorney if she does not stop this nonsense.

Joan does not get to tell the world falsehoods about others and get away with it.

Joan needs to understand that we, Gert and Ruth have a right to address falsehoods regarding our lives and our family, be it here or anywhere else.

Joan is a liar. I have already posted on this thread, but I don’t see it, how Joan has called in two false child abuse cases against me, that was in 1981 and 82. I have documents to prove that.

So Joan can continuing lying to herself and others but people who go to Joan’s sites, will also find her telling people to go to our refuting blog where in we address everything that is in Joan’s book. I encourage everyone to go and read for yourselves and decide if Joan is a liar.

Gert and Ruth have a right to speak our truth and we shall continue to do so.

 Ruth has no business in my life now. We have had no relationsh ­ip for over 3 decades. I am being stalked and bullied by my three older natural blood sisters. I want them out of my life but they keep ttrailing after me.

About my adoption: Our mother died when I was three months old. Our father placed me with my adopting parents one month later and I was legally adopted at age 1 year and 1 week. There facts are documented in my adoption papers which I petitioned for legally.

Joan_M_Wheeler: Ruth has no business in my life now. We have

Permalink  | Share it

Gert McQueen   0 minute ago (1:10 PM)
This comment is pending approval and won’t be displayed until it is approved.

Sorry wrong…I divorced myself from Joan in 1982 after she interefere ­d with my family, calling in child abuse because I ADOPTED my own son and she didn’t like that and I told her to leave my minor children alone. The last time I saw Joan was in 1992 the last time I spoke with Joan was in 2005. Both those events were my attempts to reconcile with her but Joan used both occasions to cause yet more trouble. So how does that equal stalking and bullying? It doesn’t.

Joan believes that we blood sisters do not have any right to address the many falsehoods that Joan speaks about us…she is wrong…we will continue to speak our truth and expose Joan’s lies.

 “My eldest sister, Gert, sexually molested me repeatedly during the first years of our reunion. No, this was not Genetic Sexual Attraction (as known in adoption psychology ­) this was initiated by drug and alcohol to intoxicate and to seduce me. She said it was “a way to get back to Momma”. So my eldest sister had her own idea of sex with me as she missed our dead mother and used me to that end. This first occurred when I was 20 years old and continued for about two years, which was two years after being found by this sister. It does not matter that I was “old enough to know better” because I was vulnerable from being found and having to deal with reunion and betrayal of my adoptive parents at that stage of young adulthood. Additional ­ly, my eldest sister was 29 years old at the time and in a position of authority over me (eldest sister to youngest sister). Keep in mind that I was raised an only child, too, and had no counselor or therapist to help me.
Fact is that is that my older sisters were molested by our grandfathe ­r and they think I escaped by being adopted. So they blame me for being an adoption activist. They were not adopted, I was, and they weasel into my life every chance they get.”
Gert McQueen   0 minute ago (1:22 PM)
This comment is pending approval and won’t be displayed until it is approved.

This is such utter nonsense.. ­.doesn’t Joan know that she is engaging in slander by putting this type of statements out there…Th ­is is why we are SPEAKING out against Joan Wheeler who is a liar! She believes that she can speak falsehoods like this and that the people she is slandering do not have the right to speak out themselves ­! What kind of rock does Joan live under.

I have addressed each and every word of all of Joan’s rants that she has posted in this thread, and on that cyber bullying page on our own blog called refuting a book of lies, forbidden family @ ruthsippel ­pace.wordp ­ress.com

Please go there and read my responses to each word that Joan has written.

It amazes me that Joan really believes something like the following, her words
“Keep in mind that I was raised an only child, too, and had no counselor or therapist to help me.”

Does she think that is an excuse for her wild lies! Does she think that every child had or has a counselor or therapist to help them out in their childhood? Does she really believe that because she didn’t she was USED and ABUSED by me/

Hey, people, here I am…the so-called abuser calling this liar out….
What are you going to do about it Joan…her ­e I am….call the cops

Ruth here again – so there  you have it – And I am with Gert in saying to Joan:

CALL THE COPS! LET’S SEE YOU ANSWER TO YOUR FILTHY LIES ABOUT MY GRANDFATHER!

I, Ruth Sippel Pace, do state and affirm, that my grandfather NEVER molested me. AND I WILL TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST TO THIS.

I HAVE CHALLENGED JOAN MARY WHEELER TWICE BEFORE ON THIS  BLOG TO TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST – SHE HAS NEVER RESPONDED.THIS IS THE  THIRD TIME JOAN – WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU AFRAID OF? THE TRUTH? DAM RIGHT SHE IS!

GO AHEAD JOAN – WE ARE CALLING YOUR BLUFF RIGHT NOW – CALL THE COPS AND SET UP THE POLYGRAPH!!!

SEE YOU AT THE POLYGRAPH OFFICE MS. JOAN MARY WHEELER!

Legal Notice to Joan Mary Wheeler, posted on the Huffington Post, March 5, 2011 March 5, 2011

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Announcements and updates, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

FOR LEGAL PURPOSES
Let this notice be heeded, March 5, 2011
I, Ruth Sippel Pace, have never been arrested in my life. I have never been placed on probation. I do not have a criminal record.
Joan Mary Wheeler has come on this site and has reported this. She also has provided a link to her blog that states this.
If there are any law enforcemen­t agencies reading this, please, by all means – do a background check on me and see that I, Ruth Sippel Pace do NOT have a criminal record.
Joan Mary Wheeler is a liar and THAT’S A FACT!
– electronic­ally signed, Ruth Sippel Pace, March 5, 2011, 9:21 am, EST

addendum: March 5, 2011, 2:00pm EST

Further, when Joan Mary Wheeler states in her book and on the internet that she has had multiple orders of protection against me or any other member of her birth family, this is a FALSEHOOD!

Joan Mary Wheeler obtained ONE order of protection against me in 1993. There were NO other orders of protection against me. Further, this order of protection was for SIX MONTHS and not for the ONE YEAR that Ms. Wheeler says. The date it went into effect was August 9, 1993 and it ended on February 9, 1994. She signed the complaint on July 19, 1993. I have scanned and posted here on this blog, the actual court documents that attest to this.

Joan Mary Wheeler – you are ordered to stop lying about the number of restraining orders you have obtained – it is NOT “multiple” numbers, it was only ONE!

I hereby give notice that whenever Joan Mary Wheeler posts on any forum on the internet and refers to this ONE order of protection she ever received as other than the correct dates and duration, I shall reply with the TRUTH.

RUTH SIPPEL PACE

Joan Wheeler lies again about her birth sisters on the Huffington Post site March 4, 2011 March 5, 2011

Posted by Ruth in a. What is demanded from Joan Wheeler - the purpose of this blog., Announcements and updates, Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

by Ruth Pace

On March 4, 2011, Joan Wheeler continued her character assassination and smear campaign against her birth sisters. Why? Because Gert and I dared to post a comment on the Huffington Post forum. Which is our RIGHT as Americans.

Answering an article entitled “Adoptees are Americans,” Joan Wheeler had made references AGAIN to her birth family. She has no right to be posting about ME or MY family. In her comment, Joan said that she was adopted when she was 4 months old. In my answering comment, I said that she was adopted when she was 3 months old. Joan answered and pointed out that she was 3 months old when our mom died and was adopted out a month later. I saw that she was correct, and posted again, admitting to my mistake. I do this, see, because unlike Joan, I ADMIT TO WHEN I AM WRONG!

However, Joan decided to take things to a further level. Instead of correcting me and leaving it at that, Joan just HAD to start her lying again. After she corrected me, she goes on to say that Gert and I are stalking her. And she says that she has not had a relationship with us for more than 3 decades.

Call it stalking if you want, but yes, we monitor what Joan posts on the internet, BECAUSE WE AS AMERICANS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT IS BEING SAID ABOUT US AND OUR FAMILY. If Joan does not like that, the solution is obvious: JOAN NEEDS TO STOP POSTING ABOUT HER BIRTH FAMILY!

Why do we take this stand? Because whenever Joan posts about us, it usually lies, inuendos, misreprsentations, false accusations, and exaggerations.

Case in point: right there in her return comment to me, she says “I have had no relationship with them for over 3 decades!”

THIS IS A FALSEHOOD! This is the year 2011. 3 decades is 30 years, which takes us back to 1981. Well, for crying out loud, I was one of her bridesmaids in the year 1983! She admits to this in her lying book Forbidden Family. And in her book, she relates outings to the beach with me in the years 1988 – 1990!

So when I commented, I pointed this discrepency out to her. What was her response? She goes on the attack – because in her faulty brain, she thinks that I, and my sister do not have the right to correct her. She can correct me, but will not accept a correction in turn. So she posts several posts on the Huffington site and slanders and libels us again.

Sorry Joan, but I am an American. I have the right to comment on the internet when someone lies about me or my family. If you don’t like that, then stop lying. Get used to the fact that whenever you post a lie, it WILL be answered and refuted!

Joan’s problem is that she has diarrhea of the mouth – everytime she tells a story she embellishes it. Witness the fact that she says she has had no relationship with us for over 3 decades! She touts herself as being an author – but she hasn’t learned the basics of truthtelling! She demands the truth in adoption and birth certificates, but does not deal in the truth herself!

When Joan posts on the internet about adoption, we are silent, because we don’t care about her adoption reform work. It doesn’t bother us one whit about her passion on adoption. But when she starts posting about us, or our family, you better believe we sit up and take notice – because as AMERICANS, we have that right. And we claim that right.

Joan, accept it – we are watching. If you post about us, it better be the truth – because we will always come right back at ya!

%d bloggers like this: