jump to navigation

Legal Notice by Ruth B. Pace (nee Sippel) concerning Joan Mary Wheeler’s legal name change to Doris Michol Sippel May 12, 2016

Posted by Ruth in Court Documents, legal notices, Our Family History.
comments closed

I am letting this blog notice serve as notice that I, Ruth B. Pace (nee Sippel) do not recognize Doris Michol Sippel, formerly known as Joan Mary Wheeler as a legal member of the Sippel family. She is not my legal sister. 

My father, Leonard J. Sippel removed Ms. Sippel/Wheeler from his formal obitiuary and self-written newspaper notification of his death. This was filed legally in the summer of 2009 by Leonard J. Sippel with his lawyer, and Amigone Funeral Homes of Buffalo, NY. His estate was settled and finalized a few months after his death in 2011.

Gert here…Anyone can change their name but that does NOT give any legal nor moral rights.

I agree with Ruth. No one will recognize her, what ever name she decides to use or not use. also so see this…https://gertmcqueen.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/death-notice-of-doris-sippel/

Ruth here – Right Gert. One of the things I received from the settling of my father’s estate after his death in 2011 was my mother’s bible. In the bible, were “family tree” pages.

My father made two entries in that bible on March 28, 1956. One was the death of my mother, Genevieve on March 28, 1956, and then recorded the death of Doris Michol Sippel, also on March 28, 1956.  


He had known for some time that his wife was dying, and was already making plans for the infant. The day his wife died, to him, the infant died as well. He consulted his parish priest (before my mother’s funeral) and made his decisions. The infant was then adopted by Edward and Dorothy (aka Doloris) Wheeler, the adoption being finalized on January 14, 1957. 

In 1974, the family was reunited with the now 18 year old person legally known as Joan Mary Wheeler. We all welcomed this person into our family. No legal papers were ever filed to the effect that Joan Mary Wheeler was a legal member of the Sippel family. On January 14, 1957, she became the legal daughter of the Wheelers. This is New York State law.  

Several years before his death, my father made his final plans. He purchased burial plots for himself and his wife, my stepmother. He even wrote his own obituary that was to be printed in the newspaper. 

In the summer of 2009, Joan Wheeler was at my father’s house and got into an argument with him, and cursed his Christian faith. (which she does frequently on various places on the internet). She also called my father a bastard to his face. My father’s generation view that word as meaning their parents were not married. My father took it as an insult and a slap in the face to the memory of his mother. He ordered Joan out of his house and life. Whereupon, he called his lawyer and Amigone Funeral Homes of Buffalo NY and crossed out the name Joan Mary Wheeler on his final papers. When my father died, the funeral director showed me and Gert the copy of the papers that he had, and we saw where Joan’s name was crossed out, with my father’s initials next to the deletes. (so much for Joan blaming me and Gert for the omission of her name in the newspaper notice). 

So Joan Mary Wheeler can go around and call herself Doris Michol Sippel. I get that it means a great deal to her. But the law cannot be UNDONE. In order for Joan/Doris to be a legal member of the Sippel family would be for my father to legally to adopt her as his daughter. Since he’s dead, it ain’t gonna happen!

UPDATE SEPT 2016; as older posts are being seen I’m (Gert) updating with links to my second blog and a Facebook page wherein I expose AGAIN the lies, fabrications and hate that Joan M Wheeler (Doris Michol Sippel) says about me and family. The first book ‘Forbidden Family, A Half Orphan’s Account of Her Adoption, Reunion and Social Activism‘ was pulled from publication by the publisher in May 2011. Then in 2015, she ‘self-published’ a ‘revised’ version calling it ‘Forbidden Family, an adoptee duped by adoption’. This woman has no shame no sense of family honor! Then in 2016 Joan changed her name back to her birth name and rewrote and republished the SAME crap in another book; a Third edition! CALLED ‘Forbidden Family: An Adopted Woman’s Struggle for Identity’! Talk about conning people!


this blog’s title/sub title is… DUPED BY ADOPTION & AN WOMAN’S STRUGGLE FOR IDENTITY, A BOOK STUDY an in-depth analyzes of the books called Forbidden Family; My Life as an Adoptee Duped by adoption & An Adopted Woman’s Struggle for Identity by Joan M Wheeler/Doris M Sippel.




Joan Wheeler NEVER was a sibling of ours, she is ‘the adoptee’! (from that book) September 2, 2012

Posted by gertmcqueen in Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Our Family History, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

come over to Gert’s blog to see my revisted post of another couple of chapters of Joan’s libelous book…

Joan Wheeler NEVER was a sibling of ours, she is ‘the adoptee’! (from that book)


Joan Wheeler NEVER was a sibling of ours, she is ‘the adoptee’! (from that book) by gertmcqueen

More Deluded Ramblings from Joan Wheeler’s Sick Diseased Mind April 6, 2012

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, mental illness, Our Family History, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

In Gert’s recent post “The beginnings of Joan Wheeler’s Internet campaign against her birth siblings (part 1), Gert revisits the early posts in Joan’s blog and tells about Joan’s ranting on her website on December 9 and 10, 2009. I left a comment on Gert’s post, but I want to post it all here.

But first, I want to address a paragraph from a post of Joan’s from December 11, 2009: Adoption Gone Bad – Not Reunion, where Joan is rambling on about (ho-hum) her crappy adoption:

“Meanwhile, my father was not aware that meddling relatives from his deceased wife’s family would spread filty lies about him killing his wife and that he “could not stand the sight of me” that’s why he “got rid of me”. THAT was the content of hate mail sent to me for decades from anonymous letters whom I suspect are members of my extended adoptive family who listened to these lies and beleived (sic) them.”

Really? My father KILLED my mother? She died of cancer. Her relatives said that? I’d like to know who said that. Because I had never heard it. Here is what happened:

In early winter 1955, Mom, who was pregnant, was not feeling good. By Christmas, she had to go to the hospital. They couldn’t find out what was wrong. On January 7, 1956, she miscarried her baby at 7 months gestation. The baby was placed in an incubator and survived. Mom had exploratory surgery on January 19. She was found to be full of cancer, nothing could be done, so they closed her up.

Meanwhile, her brothers, asked my father to send her to Roswell Park Cancer Institute. I am unclear why, perhaps he didn’t have proper health insurance in those days, but my father said he couldn’t afford a specialist. The brothers talked it over and they agreed to pool their money. (as told to me in a telephone conversation with my uncle in the spring of 2010). Meanwhile, (and this was told to me by my mother’s sister), my mother knew that it was hopeless, and also refused to see a specialist. This is not uncommon, at the end stages of life, sometimes people just “know” it is their time – why bother with treatments etc.? – My aunt also told me she told her brothers this and to “let it go.”

My mother died on March 28, 1956. My uncles, in their grief, blamed my father. This also is not uncommon. Funerals sometimes bring out the worst in people. BUT they blamed him for her death – by not calling a specialist, but NOT killing her. There is a difference.

During the 1960’s, two of my uncles and my aunt lived in the city of Buffalo. I saw them frequently. The other two uncles lived where it was necessary to have a car to see them. We did not have a car in our family. But I did see my uncles from time to time.

I well remember my cousin Judy’s wedding in the early 60’s. I was there with my father. Judy’s husband Jerry, well respected my father. Anytime the family got together for funerals or weddings, or family reunions, my cousins all showed respect for  “UNCLE Leonard.” My uncles, yes, because of the bad feelings, did not associate with my father. But they never disrespected him.

There were two incidents, in 1985 and in 1990, where my Uncle Mike snubbed my father. And my father took offense to it. I told him both times to just let it go. There were no words spoken between Mike and my father – just a snubbing – and in the long run – who cares? – Uncle Mike, and indeed ALL my mother’s brothers – despite their not liking my father, NEVER held any of this against us, Leonard’s children. We were always welcomed in their houses. And loved.

So to refute what Joan blabs on nonsensically and irresponsibly:
1. My father did not “murder” my mother.
2. My mother’s brothers did not ever say he “murdered” or “killed” my mother.
3. Yes, they held it against my father (wrongly) for not taking  my mother to a specialist.
4. Yes, there were bad feelings down the years towards my father.
5. Except for 2 short and relatively insignificant instances, my uncles never disrespected my father.
6. My uncles raised their children to be respectful to my father.
7. My uncles never disrespected me or my siblings, despite their not liking our father.
8. My cousins never disrespected me or my father.

Now here is my comment that I posted to Gert’s post, and it certainly applies to this BULLSHIT that people said my father killed my mother as well:

Joan gets herself into a rage and starts talking nonsense. She does it in real life, I’ve seen in letters she’s written to me – and now we see it on the internet. She will start out quietly and rationally, then rapidly starts talking about things that have NOT been in the conversation – she then pulls those things into the conversation and starts accusing the other person of it. Then her voice becomes rapid and high-pitched and she ends up screaming. And swearing. (maybe she has Tourette’s). Any chance of the other person to continue an intelligent conversation, or even denying what Joan is accusing them of is gone. You have NO chance to stand up for yourself – because if she ‘s in person, your ears are hurting, a fight now starts. If on the phone, as soon as you begin to defend yourself, Joan hangs up on you.

She is an irrational mentally ill person. Like the stewardess who had the melt-down on the plane a couple of weeks ago, Joan is screaming nonsense. The stewardess was yelling the plane was going to crash and she wasn’t going to be responsible – before they even took off – and so does Joan – she takes off on a nonsense tangent – things you don’t even know what she’s talking about – things that happened to her, but not to you. But in her delusions, she believes that YOU did it. She speculates as to your motives. Every little look on your face, gesture of your arm, is interpreted. And usually wrongly. And then – she’s got you!

“Aha!”, she thinks, “I just KNEW it, she thinks I’m a shit head, she’s the one who called me this morning and hung on me. (it was probably an innocent wrong number) – yeah, those f’ing birth sisters of mine – they think I should have died,then they would have had mom to themselves. Well, I’ll show them. I’ll call the police on them. I’ll write to the mayor about them. yeah, because I know that’s what they did to me. They hate me. They’ve hated me for years. I know everything they’ve done.”

And on and on she goes. Then she starts BELIEVING the things that we’ve “supposedly” done. And reports those things as true.

This is a sick woman who seriously needs to be committed to the psych center. She is always whining that she wants HER privacy respected, but as we see in her rants, she blabbed OUR personal business to the internet.

— end of comment —

Yep – Joan gets a wild idea in her head and goes off and running with it. Never mind it never happened, it isn’t the truth, it’s a deluded imagining of someone who is very clearly mentally ill. To post on the internet that 1. my father killed my mother. 2. my uncles said this about my mother – IS SMEARING THE REPUTATIONS OF MY FATHER AND MY UNCLES. And make no mistake about it – JOAN LOVES TO SMEAR PEOPLE’S REPUTATIONS. I don’t give a shit if she says she got hate mail from her adoptive family down through the years that said that about my father and my uncles – JOAN HAS NO BUSINESS PUTTING THAT CRAP ON THE INTERNET – SHE IS DAMAGING THE REPUTATION OF DEAD PEOPLE WHO ARE NO LONGER HERE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES! Rumors, innuendos, gossip, and only JOAN’S version of my family’s dynamics.

WHERE ARE THE LETTERS THAT SAYS MY UNCLES ACCUSE MY FATHER OF KILLING MY MOTHER JOAN? POST THEM. — Bah, Joan is liar, she has no letters – all we have is her hearsay that her adoptive family wrote that shit. I don’t believe for one minute that ANYbody wrote that shit.

We have seen time and again, the past two and a half years, Joan throwing accusations out left and right against a whole bunch of people on her blog, on her cyberbullying page, on the adult adoptee forum, and on various other places on the internet. Accusations that are NEVER substantiated with any kind of PROOF! Meanhwile, all over this blog, and our other blog, I have posted photographs, documents, actual court documents, written letters (by Joan) that prove without a shadow of a doubt that Joan Wheeler is a filthy liar. Because of actual court documents that proved Joan lied in her so-called “truthful” book, her book got yanked by the publisher. Joan needs now to remove her cyberbullying page and ALL mention of her birth sisters on her Forbidden Family website. She needs to stop spreading rumors and lies about us and our family. Until these demands are met, this blog and it’s sister blog will stay up and we will continue to harvest EVERY word that Joan says on the internet – and if it is NOT the truth – we will post the truth.

The only way to stop us Joan, is to remove all mention of us from your blog, and come forth publicly and admit you lied in your book and to publicly apologize to us and ALL members of our family for your smearing good people’s names through the mud.

where does Joan get off painting everybody as murderers, harassers, and downright despicable people?
Seems to me that I know who the despicable person is – and their name is Joan Mary Wheeler!

My complaint to Trafford Publications concerning the slander and libel contained in the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler November 30, 2011

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

Here it is – at long last – my official complaint to Trafford Publications – the complaint that made them take a look at the book they published. The contract they had with Joan Wheeler was that the book was “ready-to-publish” that is, all editing for content had been done already.

Let me explain. Trafford is a publishing vehicle for authors to self-publish their works. Trafford offers several packages. They offer editing services, but Joan opted out of that. I wonder why? Because one of the articles of the standard contract Trafford offers to their prospective authors is: no obscenities. Yet on page 370 Joan publishes a post card that she received in the mail that had obscenities written on it. (and as usual – she blames ME for it – even tho the handwriting is not mine). – Anyway, she slipped that in under Trafford’s nose – she told Trafford that the book had already been edited for content. Therefore, nobody at Trafford ever read the entire manuscript – they took Joan at her word and published it.

Joan also signed the contract that stated that no slander or libel was contained in the book. She signed the contract under false pretenses. In my last two posts, A Letter I wrote to the district attorney in 1995 sheds light on Joan Wheeler’s harassments of me and refutes the lies on pages 325-333 in her book Forbidden Family  and  Graphics of scanned court documents, etc. that prove without a doubt that Joan Wheeler is a liar in her book Forbidden Family,  I outlined many lies contained in only pages 295 – 342, and provided actual court documents and actual letters (one hand-written by Joan, one typed out, and contains a hand-written note by Joan), that refuted those lies contained in only less than 50 pages in that hideous 600 page plus book.

When Joan signed the contract with Trafford, they took her word the book contained no slander or libel and published the book. When they received my complaint (along with one from Gert), it took them from January 2011 to May 2011 to research my complaint. In other words – someone from Trafford FINALLY sat down and read the garbage they had unwittingly published.  Not only did they have to read the garbage that Joan wrote – they had to look through the court documents that I sent them. Then they had to sift through all the convoluted lies and twisting of facts, events, dates that Joan did on those few 50 pages and that I outlined in my post A Letter I wrote to the district attorney in 1995 sheds light on Joan Wheeler’s harassments of me and refutes the lies on pages 325-333 in her book Forbidden Family .

The result? Trafford’s editors and legal staff agreed that Joan, by signing the contract under false pretenses, LIED to them and pulled the wool over their eyes. Their only recourse was to: PULL THAT GARBAGE BOOK  FROM PUBLICATION.

I also pointed out to Trafford that the photograph on the back cover of that garbage book is of ME and my siblings and parents. Joan had no right to publish that photograph. It was taken in 1955. Joan was not born until 1956.She was adopted out a year later. She was given COPY of it almost 20 years later. Copies of that family photograph were distributed to many family members during the 1950’s and 1960’s. One of the articles in the contract that Joan entered into with Trafford was that she “was the sole copyright owner of all content of the work.” She did not, and DOES NOT own the copyrights to MY photograph. Joan has a little blurb on her website that the faces are blurry and obscured by text – that is just her trying to get out of the mess that SHE alone got herself into. When I pointed out to Trafford (in a telephone call with Eugene Hopkins, at 11:am on May 9, 2011), that Joan did not get permission from ME (orally or written) to publish MY photograph – Mr. Hopkins agreed right then and there to PULL THE BOOK FROM PUBLICATION!

That happened on May 9, 2011, and to this day, November 30, 2011, Joan, in her delusional state, her continual REFUSAL TO FACE REALITY – still has a link on her website that directs “buyers” of this garbage book to a sales page on Trafford’s website – a page THAT NO LONGER EXISTS because Trafford pulled it down!

Joan Wheeler is a pathological LIAR – she not only lies to people to their face, she lies on the internet. She spent more than half of her life writing her precious book – the book that she invested so much wasted time and energy on – finally got the stupid thing published, but then got it pulled because she not only LIED in the book – she LIED to the publisher that it contained no lies.

AND this delusional LIAR has a facebook page promoting this book. A DEAD BOOK!  Ok, she made the page over a year ago – but it’s still in existence. BUT – she recently (October 2011) created an account on The Huffington Post, using this page. A page that promotes a DEAD BOOK! (because she can’t register on Huffington under her regular facebook page – thanks to her posting some lying shit about us back in March 2011 – and she got booted off of Huffington).  So what does she do – she re-registers under false pretenses. Using a dead book. Will she never learn NOT TO LIE?

So here is my complaint. There is a list of documents – I’m not going to post them all. Go here to this post to see only a couple of them. They are enough to back up my TRUTH of what happened. And to show how Joan Wheeler LIED in her book about me.

Part 1 of complaint of Ruth Sippel Pace

Re: book, Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler, published by Trafford

 Submission by Ruth Sippel Pace, birth sister of Joan Wheeler, author of the book Forbidden Family.

 For consideration of Trafford Publishing to rescind their contract with Ms. Wheeler regarding the publication of this book, on the grounds that the book contains many falsehoods, slanderous statements about me, Ruth Sippel Pace and other members of my family. The book also contains references to my life, which are personal in nature, and the author has not been given my permission to discuss with anyone, nor publish them in a book.

    Also, my photograph is published on the back cover, my face is clear, even though it is a picture of me as a child. I never gave permission for this picture to be published. The picture of my father’s face is clear. The author’s stance of her changing the names of living person’s in the book is enough to provide privacy does not hold up to the fact that she uses her own real name, Joan Wheeler in the book, identifies the city of her birth and the city of the birth of her birth siblings, as that of Buffalo, New York. Any person with any reasonable intelligence and who ever knew my father, would recognize his picture on the back cover of the book and put names to people mentioned in the book. My father worked for the city of Buffalo in Buffalo’s City Hall for more than 30 years and is well known. We also have a large family, and the Wheeler clan is also very large. Also, the details of Joan’s adoption have been publicized in the past, via a television interview of Joan and myself (together), and newspaper interviews of Joan and my father (separately). In the case of the television interview, both my face and Joan’s were in clear view, and our names were given on camera. In the newspaper articles, both my father, and Joan, had their photographs published, with their names published with the photos.

 In a conversation between my sister Gert McQueen and Mr. Tubio, Mr. Tubio requested the most telling of the lies we have found in the book Forbidden Family. I will start by refuting Joan’s narration of court cases that Joan and I were involved in against each other. This narration is on the following pages: 314 – 317, 322-333, 362-368. Unfortunately, Joan not only lies about actual events that happened between us, and the court cases, but mixes up the court cases with each other until there is such a convoluted narration of these events, that I have to resort to first telling you in a few short paragraphs, exactly what happened before I can point out any slanderous comments that are contained in these pages. I do have, scanned copies of actual court documents that support the truth of what happened. These are included at the end of this email, are listed as thus:

 01 -Joan’s complaint July 9, 1993

02a – restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

02b – closeup dates restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

02c – closeup name restraining order Aug 9,93 – Feb 9,94

03 – Joan’s letter to Albany, New York Dec 31, 94

04 – Ruth’s complaint 3-7-95

05 – Joan’s letter to John

06 – summons April 19 95

07  – certificate from Buffalo Police Academy 8-29-98

08  – Ruth’s petition to Family Court 6-4-99

09 – summons to Family Court 6-4-99

10 – temporary restraining. 6-4-99

11 – one year restraining order June 24, 99 – June 24, 00

 When it is necessary to refer to these evidence documents, during my narrative and the narrative contained in the book, I will be referring to them by their assigned number.

My second email contains the remainder of the many lies and invasions of my privacy that are contained in this book.

 I have listed the page number first, then the quote from the book in bold, and my objection/telling of the truth follows. Joan Wheeler refers to me, Ruth Sippel Pace as Brenda in her book. It is my contention that Ms. Wheeler’s purpose for writing the book is a means of revenge and hurting people that have ever disagreed with her. There are many personal attacks on me in this book. Throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler portrays me as an uneducated inner city ghetto dweller with a foul mouth and a person who drinks all the time. I have found many personal hateful slurs directed at me in this book. I believe she included these slurs in an attempt to hurt me, as she has done many things to me in the past 25 years to hurt me. For example, she made a complaint to my job that I was a computer hacker. After they investigated me, found me innocent, and told her this, she would NOT accept it. She called my job almost everyday for several months trying to get me fired. This book is just a continuation of Ms. Wheeler’s hate campaign against myself and others. Throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler puts words into other people’s mouths, those words usually are her own thoughts and she does this to lend credence to her fantasy that people agree with her on the topic she is writing about. And to lend credence that people actually DID agree with her, as she reports in the book.

    Right from the beginning, Ms. Wheeler presents a falsehood:

Page xvi

“I believe I have written a fair and accurate account.” “ This is my story as it happened to me.”

 I have caught Ms. Wheeler in many out and out lies that cannot be construed as a faulty memory, the most telling is blatant falsifications of actual court proceedings between Ms. Wheeler and myself and the decisions of the court.

     The court proceedings between me and Joan had their beginnings in 1990 when Joan and her ex-husband stole several hundred dollars from me. Between 1990-1992, there were many arguments between us over this. The theft of the money was one of previous misdeeds Joan had done to me.  It got to the point that in disgust, I told Joan I wanted nothing more to do with her. In February 1993, just before Valentine’s Day, I received a greeting card in the mail. Actually, the envelope was addressed to me. Inside was a Valentine’s Day card, for my husband, supposedly from Joan’s children. It was not a Valentine’s card that children hand out, it was a specialty card, for a “special Uncle.” (this was just the beginning of Joan’s playing games with the mail. I received many envelopes addressed to me, but the letter inside was for my sister Gert (who did not live in Buffalo, or the envelope was addressed to me and my husband, with the letter for me. Joan would also manipulate the return address and zip-codes so that if I attempted to refuse it and “return to sender” the post office’s machines would spit it back for delivery back to me). In May 1993, another envelope addressed to me arrived, inside was a forged letter – supposedly from my 10 year old nephew to my husband, but on close examination, you could tell the sloppy printing was Joan’s.

    During this time, Joan was receiving annoyance phone calls and she suspected me. She called the police and the phone company and arranged to have her line tapped. To ensure that I would call her, she sent a Father’s Day card, supposedly from her children, to my husband, and again, the envelope was addressed to me. And I took the bait. I called her, and she said, “hold on.” Click. ?? I called back. “Hold on.” Click. I called again, “Joan, this is Ruth.” I intended to ask why the envelopes were addressed to me, but the contents were for my husband, but then Joan swore at me and hung up. I got tired of her game and gave up.

    The following week, my electricity was cut off, as my husband and I were undergoing some financial difficulties. Knowing that Joan owed me over $700.00, I called her. I was crying and said, “Joan, I need help.” She hung up on me. I tried a couple more times. She kept hanging up on me. I got angry and called her and swore at her.

    Shortly afterwards, I got a call from Buffalo Police Detective Martin Harrington, who wanted to know why I was calling Joan. I told him exactly what I just wrote here. He said he believed me, and would recommend that Joan drop any charges against me. She went ahead and filed harassment charges on me, signing the complaint on July 9, 1993. (DOC 01) I do not have the summons for that court case, but appeared in front of Judge Robert Russell on August 9, 1993, where Joan was granted a six-month Order of Protection against, on ACD. (Adjournment on Consideration of Dismissal). (DOC 02a). The writing is hard to read, so you must look at DOCS 02b and 02c to make out my name, and dates of the duration of the six-month restraining order – August 9, 1993 to February 9, 1994.

     Sometime in 1994, Ms. Wheeler’s medical bill from my employer (Buffalo General Hospital) got mixed up with a bill from another patient. Ms. Wheeler accused me of computer hacking and lodged a formal complaint with my employer. I was investigated and found innocent but Ms. Wheeler would not accept this. For several months, beginning in the fall of 1994 and continuing through January 1995, she was calling various departments in the hospital and telling numerous people how “bad” I was.  On December 22, 1994, a child abuse call was made against Ms. Wheeler. The caller identified themselves as me, saying that Ms. Wheeler had sex with my husband in front of her children. On December 31, 1994, Ms. Wheeler wrote to the New York State Department of Social Services, Child Abuse Maltreatment Register, in Albany, New York, to request a copy of the information of that call. (DOC 03).  In that letter, Joan refers to our court case of August 9, 1993, and informs them that I was put on six months “probation.”

    As my then fiancé, John Pace was named in the child abuse call, he was involved in talks with the Child Protective Services people, but HE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING, BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT I DIDN’T PLACE THE CALL. HE WANTED TO KEEP ME OUT IT, WHILE HE WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON.

    The first I heard of this was in February 1995, when I received a large manila envelope from Ms. Wheeler. Inside were copies of letters that she wrote to the mayor of Buffalo, the commissioner of our local (Erie County) social services department, the formal complaint she wrote to my employer, and the letter of December 31, 1994 that she wrote to Albany New York. When I read the lie about me being placed on probation in 1993, I filed harassment charges against Ms. Wheeler on March 7, 1995.  (DOC 04). On March 17, 1995, Ms. Wheeler sent a letter to my fiancé via his mother’s house begging him to ask me to drop the charges and urged him to leave me. (DOC 05).

    We appeared before Judge Margaret Anderson three times, because it was adjourned twice due to a lack of time in the courtroom for the first two dates. On the first date of April 3, 1995, Judge Anderson instructed the court that no children were to be brought to the court. At the next court appearance of April 19, 1995, (afternoon session), (DOC 06), Ms. Wheeler did bring her two children, but they stayed out in the hallway with her friend Carol, even though it was a school day. At one point in the court, while we were waiting for our case to be called, I left to use the ladies room. I saw Carol and the children, but said nothing. Our case was adjourned to a date in May 1995. On this date, Judge Anderson dismissed my case against Ms. Wheeler, saying that “sisters should get along.” I thanked the judge for considering my case and left.

    I continued receiving harassing letters from Ms. Wheeler through the next several years. I ignored her. In the meantime, I involved myself in organizing a block club for my street, and became a neighborhood activist to improve the quality of life in my neighborhood. As part of this, I took a short course through the Buffalo Police Academy to be a VIABLE volunteer (Volunteers in Aiding Buffalo Law Enforcement). To be considered for this, candidates had to undergo a background check, and since I had a clean record (the one six-month restraining order had been summarily dismissed, because I had abided by the judge’s instructions to me to stay away from Ms. Wheeler). I had no arrest record, no record of probation, nothing. I was awarded my certificate and appointment to the VIABLE program on August 29, 1998. (DOC 07).

    On February 15, 1999, I received another letter from Joan, and in it she tells me that her son saw me driving past her house (DOC 08). This was a lie, as I didn’t even have a car at that time. I called her house to tell her to leave me alone and a male answered, and I hung up, saying nothing. I then sent her a letter telling her to leave me alone. I told her that I did not have a car, did not drive past her house. And that since she had a man now, she should concentrate on her own life and to leave me and MY man alone.

    Then on February 23, 1999, I received an envelope addressed to me. I did not recognize the return address, but inside was a letter to me from Ms. Wheeler, informing me that my husband had gotten the next door neighbor pregnant and the child was born in 1994 (totally untrue, as the only children born to women living in that house were 2 boys). (DOC 09).

    I met with the woman who lived at the address on the envelope – she was Carol, Joan’s friend who was in the court with Joan’s children. Carol told me that the previous year, Joan had been asking for a “hit man” to take me out. I went to the District Attorney’s office and they said that because it was hearsay, they couldn’t do anything about it. I spent the next two months trying to get harassment charges filed against Joan. I got another manila envelope from Joan, which I refused to open. I returned it, marking it “return to sender” and Joan then manipulated the return address and it came back to my house. I decided to return it to her in person. A neighbor drove me to Joan’s house. His car was leaking transmission oil and he kept a can of oil on hand. He suggested I put the oil on the envelope to prevent Joan from putting it in the postal service again. Which we did and I threw the envelope up on her lawn.

     This resulted in Joan calling my house and swearing at me. I talked to several people and they suggested I petition Family Court, as the District Attorneys were tired of the both of us sisters and not taking this matter seriously. On June 4, 1999, I did just that. (DOC 10). They listened to my complaint, and in front of me, they went into the court computer system and found the two previous court cases involving Ms. Wheeler and myself (1993 and 1995). They typed this information onto the complaint that I signed, issued a summons for both me and Joan to appear in Family Court on June 24, 1999. (DOC 11), and granted me a temporary restraining order ON THE SPOT (DOC 12). On June 24, 1999, Judge Margaret Szczur made the temporary restraining order permanent. (DOC 13).

 Now we shall examine how Ms. Wheeler presents these facts in her book Forbidden Family.

 Pages 314 – 315

Joan is discussing a conversation she is having with Det. M. H. The subject of her threatening to report our sister Kathy to the British Immigration Department comes up, as well as a couple of my pets.

 Det. H. did not know that there was any threat to call The Home Office – Back in 1989, Joan got into a snit with Kathy and said to me, “I ought to call immigration on her.” (as a revenge tactic). I told her not to do that. And I hadn’t told Kathy what Joan threatened to do, because Joan promised me she wouldn’t make the call. I eventually did tell Kathy, but it was AFTER this alleged conversation takes place. Joan alleges that the detective asks Joan who Brandy Sippel is, because supposedly, my phone bill is listed under that name. Which is false. Joan tells the detective that Brandy is one of my cats. False, Brandy was my dog. She mentions another one of my cats on page 315, Francoise (this conversation with the detective is supposedly taking place in February 1993). My cat Francoise had been put to sleep in 1992.

 Page 316 time frame – February/March 1993

“the detective issued a warrant for Brenda’s arrest to appear in a Buffalo Court. A Restraining Order was then issued to keep her away from me for a year.”

 Lie. Joan signed the complaint about annoyance calls from me on July 9, 1993, not in February or March 1993. The calls weren’t made until June 1993. see documents 01, Also an arrest warrant was NOT issued. What was issued was a summons to me by the court, not the detective, to appear in court. When a person is summoned into court, and they do NOT appear, THEN an arrest warrant is issued, and this warrant is issued by the COURT, not any police officer. As I did appear in court, no arrest warrant was ever issued, and I was never placed under arrest. Also the Order of Protection was for a period of six months, NOT one year. (DOCS 02a, 02b, 02c).  And this was issued ACD – Adjournment on Consideration of Dismissal, which means that if I stayed away from Joan for the six months, all charges would be dismissed. I did abide by the court’s orders – I stayed away from her and the charges were dismissed. We appeared in court on August 9, 1993, and the Order of Protection was for the dates August 9, 1993 – February 9, 1994.

 Pages 323-324

Joan is describing an event that took place on Saturday, July 31, 1993 (but she reports in the book it was for August 1, 1993. She and ex-husband were moving and had enlisted the help of my husband. Joan reports that I followed him to her house in my car, began screaming at him in the street, went up to Joan and accused her of having an affair with my husband. Joan says that four witnesses heard me screaming in the street. On page 323 she says: “The Restraining Order against Brenda wasn’t good enough to keep her away. On August 1, 1993…”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

As we had not appeared in court yet, nor the restraining order set in place yet, I was in no violation of a restraining order on July 31, or August 1, 1993. I did not follow my husband in my car, we did not have a car at the time. I took the bus there. I had told my husband in the past I did not want him going to Joan’s house because of the trouble she was causing me. He continued to go there to visit with the children. I also repeated this request on July 31, 1993, and Joan overheard me, as she was standing nearby. I was not screaming at him in the street. I did not at any time accuse them of having an affair. I would also like to know who the four witnesses to my screaming are. I did not see four people outside the house. I did see ONE woman standing in Joan’s doorway, while Joan was standing outside the doorway, while my husband and I were on the sidewalk in front of the house. After I talked to my husband, who agreed to return home, I went across the street where Joan’s husband Colby Bell was putting things in his car. As I went to talk to him, it was JOAN who started the screaming, at her husband Colby — that he was not to talk to me. Joan then yelled at MY husband, who was walking down the street away from Joan’s house, that he should not be listening to me and he better leave me. It was at THIS point that I did yell back at Joan to shut up, and just because she can rule over HER husband, she wasn’t going to rule over mine, nor me. It was at this point, two of her friends came out of the house and they were looking at disgust at Joan.  I then left and walked down the street to join my husband.

 Page 325

“Brenda didn’t abide by the Order. She continued telephoning me at Brian’s house. Four months of harassment followed. … I had just come home from filing yet another harassment charge against Brenda in a different town jurisdiction.”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace, contradictory statement by Joan.

I did abide by the Order. I did not telephone Brian’s house, as I did not know where he lived, nor the phone number. I did not harass Joan for four months. No additional harassment charges were filed against me in 1993. The contradiction and proof of this lie: if I were in violation of the restraining order, and she did indeed file additional harassment charges against me, I would have been placed under arrest. This did NOT happen.

 Page 328

“The harassment charges against Brenda were dropped.”

 Lie. There were no additional harassment charges against me.

 Pages 328-329

Joan describes an event in early December 1993 of a child abuse call that was placed against her and the call also implicated my husband. “It was obvious that Brenda made this ‘anonymous’ report.”

 Lie, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. The child abuse call was made on December 22, 1994. The caller identified themselves as Ruth Sippel and named my husband. It is NOT obvious that I made this call. What IS obvious is that if I were going to make a prank child abuse call, I would NOT use my real name, nor name my husband and risk him getting into trouble. See DOC 03, Joan’s letter to the New York State Department of Social Services, Child Abuse and Maltreatment Register, in Albany, New York, dated December 31, 1994, which lists the correct date of the child abuse call, which was December 22, 1994. In this letter, Joan states: “We know this report was made by Ruth.” How could she “know?” The matter had just begun it’s investigation. Also Joan states, regarding the court case in 1993 over the telephone calls and she was granted the six months restraining order: “Ruth was found guilty and placed on six months probation.” Here we see ABSOLUTE PROOF of Joan’s history of lying to people about me. And to official people in law enforcement and child protective services!

 Page 329 time frame – December 1993 to about March 1994

“What followed the allegations of child abuse and neglect were three months of court dates waiting for the first charges to be cleared.”

 Lies. There were NO court dates between Joan and I during these months. See DOC 10, of my petition to Family Court, June 4, 1999, that lists the 2 prior court case between Joan and I were in 1993 and 1995, NOT 1994.

 Page 329-330 time frame – early 1994

“Our only recourse was to seek and Order of Protection. Three months of court dates followed. I brought my children to court as they were part of the case and needed to see for themselves just what was going on.”

 Lie, there were no court dates between Joan and myself in 1994.

Admission to possible child abuse – Joan does not say that her children were required to be in court, she says she BROUGHT them to a court case between adults. In 1994, her children were aged 10 and 7. Why would anyone drag young children to court to witness this?

 Pages 329 –330 time frame in the book – early 1994

“Three months of court dates followed.”

 Lies, mixing up years of court dates. The court case Joan is referring here happened in 1995, the case that I brought against her, appearing before Judge Margaret Anderson three times, because it was adjourned twice due to a lack of time in the courtroom for the first two dates. On the first date of April 3, 1995, Judge Anderson instructed the court that no children were to be brought to the court. At the next court appearance of April 19, 1995, (afternoon session), (DOC 06), Ms. Wheeler did bring her two children, but they stayed out in the hallway with her friend Carol, even though it was a school day. At one point in the court, while we were waiting for our case to be called, I left to use the ladies room. I saw Carol and the children, but said nothing.

 Page 330

“The court broke for lunch. The room full of people went to the lobby. My ten-year old son and seven year old daughter went up to the drinking fountain. I was at their side. Aunt Brenda came up to them and yelled, “You see what your mother is doing to me? You see? She drags you in court to see your poor Aunt go through this.”

 Lie. This never happened. NEVER. We were NEVER in court in 1994. At no time did I EVER disrespect her children. Telling sign this is a lie (despite the actual court documents): Joan does not say she approached a court bailiff, the prosecutor, judge or any one of many sheriff’s deputies that are always standing on guard to prevent these kinds of altercations. 

 Page 330

“Mom and I were granted an Order of Protection against Brenda in the summer of 1994. It was good for one year.”

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Again, refer to DOC 10, my petition to Family Court, June 4, 1999, that lists the 2 prior court case between Joan and I were in 1993 and 1995, NOT 1994.

    Also, how could Joan and her mother and her children attend three months of court case in early 1994, Joan and her mother obtain an Order of Protection against me in the summer of 1994, over a child abuse call that HAD NOT BEEN PLACED YET? The call was not made until December 22, 1994, and we have Joan’s letter to Albany (DOC 03) to prove this.

   Also, nowhere in the book does Joan refer to the harassment charges I placed against her in 1995.

 Page 332

“Toward the end of May 1994 … my mother were … in the middle of ugly court dates against Brenda.”

 Lie, as stated above, there were no court dates for any court case between Joan and me in 1994.

 Pages 332- 333 – time frame 1994

Joan is describing the mix-up of her hospital bill. On page 333, she writes: “ A letter arrived a month later stating the error was attributed to a computer glitch and that my sister wasn’t involved. I wasn’t convinced. I called the head of the billing department and told him everything that was going on and that I wanted no further contact from Brenda.”

 Admission of Joan’s invading Ruth’s privacy. Proof of Joan having delusions. Proof of Joan not accepting what is true. She made a complaint of computer hacking against me. My employer investigated her complaint. Found that I did not do it. COULD not do it, as I work 11pm to 7am and the computers on the nursing stations ARE NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO THE BILLING DEPARTMENT COMPUTERS. My employer told Joan I was innocent, but Joan refuses to believe it. She is so full of hate against me, that no matter what nice thing any one says about me – she will fly into a rage over it and will not accept it.

 Page 333 – time frame in the book 1994

“A few days later, a padded manila envelope appeared on my front lawn. I picked it up. It was covered with a slimy greasy substance that I guessed to be cooking oil. … I was stupid enough to open it up. A note inside stated that ‘You, Joan, have been cut out of my life forever.’ Out tumbled photographs. … cut from ordinary 35 mm photos … they were photos of me, photos of my children. Since there was only one of my sisters living in Buffalo, I knew who had done this—-Brenda.”

 Lies, mixing up calendar years of events. As I had already indicated in my narration of The Feud between Joan and myself in the beginning of this complaint, this envelope was the one that I had received from JOAN in the year of 1999. This is the one that I refused to accept, marked “return to sender,” but Joan had manipulated the return address zip code so that the envelope would not returned to her house, but come to my house. This was the envelope that I decided to return to her in person. A neighbor drove me to Joan’s house. His car was leaking transmission oil and he kept a can of oil on hand. He suggested I put the oil on the envelope to prevent Joan from putting it in the postal service again. Which we did and I threw the envelope up on her lawn.  (Ruth’s note, November 30, 2011 – When I submitted this complaint, I made an error – I myself had mixed up a couple of events. My neighbor D. did have a car that leaked transmission fluid. At the time that John and I did not have a car. And he would take me grocery shopping – we would frequently have to stop to add transmission fluid, as I would have to a few years later, when I got a clunker car. I only realized my mistake a few months ago (July 2011) when I found a manilla folder that contained the actual letter that I wrote and then I realized my mistake. I’m human, just like everybody else. And when I make a mistake, I own up to it. Joan whines that her book is “to the best of her recollection.” But there is NO way that can be true – I can allow SOME forgetfulness – but to be saying we were in court when we weren’t – to say the court ruled this or that way, when it didn’t, to say that I was arrested, when I was not, to say that she herself was arrested, when she never was – is NOT forgetfulness – it is out and out LIES).

   Also, I never sent “cut up” photos of her to her EVER. I did cut her pictures out of photos in my personal photo album, but I had thrown them in the garbage. She only knows of the “cut up” photos, because she had looked at my photo albums in the year 2003 and saw that she had been cut out of my personal photos. We see Joan in all her vindictive glory here, she herself sent me the manila envelope, to make sure she would get it back unopened, I had to resort to putting oil on it so she could not use the post office again in her harassment of me. Then she reports the wrong year of the event, then she takes an event that happened in another year, and pads up her hate campaign against me to say that I was the responsible for the envelope in the first place. AND sent her photographs in an envelope that came from her originally, and I returned to her UNOPENED!

 Page 361

Ms. Wheeler describes herself calling my cousin on the phone and screaming at her.

 Admission of Ms. Wheeler harassing Gail.

 Page 363

Ms. Wheeler describes that Gail called the police. And that the Town of Eden, New York police called her on the phone. And then she was summoned into court for harassment.

 This is true. Because Gail knew of the harassment that I was receiving from Ms. Wheeler and as she was going through a divorce, as well as battling cancer, she was not going to accept being harassed.

 Page 363

Ms. Wheeler describes her talking to her friend Carol who suggested to Joan to write me a letter using her return address. The letter I received was a hate letter informing me that my husband got the next door neighbor pregnant.

Ms. Wheeler describes me as harassing Carol. (DOC 09)

 Lies, twisting of facts, not reporting the facts as they happened.

Yes, I got a letter from Joan from that address. However, Carol did NOT give Joan permission to use her address. And this is a contradiction of Joan’s behavior. She does not want letters from me, but goes ahead and writes letters to me. When I received the letter from Carol’s house, I went to her house. She wasn’t home and the name on the mailbox was not Joan. I left a note listing my name and address and asked why a harassing letter from Joan came from her house to me. I returned to her house a few days later and Carol said that her and Joan had been friends, had a falling out, and no, she did not give permission for Joan to use her address. Carol said that by doing this, Joan was showing her anger at both me and her. Carol began harassment charges on Joan the next day. While I was at Carol’s house, she informed that Joan had made a death threat against me and the next day, I also began harassment charges against Joan. This was also the same month that the Town of Eden Police (and NOT Gail) filed harassment charges against Joan.

    See DOCS 08 and 09 to see the hate mail that I was receiving from Joan. 09 was the one that came with Carol’s return address and we see again Joan’s history of lying about the outcome of the court cases. She once again states that I was placed on six months probation, which I was not.

 Page 364

Ms. Wheeler says that she was arrested three times in one month due to these three harassment charges.

 Lies. She was not arrested. She was “summoned” to appear in court. An arrest warrant would have been issued if she did not appear in court. Since she did appear for all three of these harassment charges, she was not arrested. Please see accompanying documentation that she was “summoned” into Family Court due to my harassment charge against her. (document number 08).

 Page 364 time frame 1999

Ms. Wheeler describes the judge (a male) as not letting me talk and that he kept cutting me off, and that me and my best friend sat directly in front of her and her mother. She also says that I was waving around a document from the Buffalo Police Academy. She does say that in the court case between me and her, I was given a one-year Order of Protection against her.

 Lies. Combining two different court cases. Contradictory behavior of the judge as reported by Joan.

 The court case that the judge dismissed my harassment charges against Joan was in 1995. It was Judge Margaret Anderson who dismissed the charges saying “sisters should get along.” Judge Anderson did let me speak, and yes, I was not pleased with her decision, but I accepted it. I did not have the document from the Buffalo Police Academy until 1998, where I attended a course there. (DOC 07). A pre-requisite would be a thorough background check on me conducted by the Buffalo Police Department showing that I have a clean record. Which I had, despite Joan saying on page 316 that I was placed under arrest. Part of my harassment charge against Ms. Wheeler was her slandering me by saying that I had an arrest record.

    The court case in 1999 was in Family Court, under Judge Margaret Szczur, who also let me speak, and granted me an Order of Protection against Ms. Wheeler for the duration of one year. I did show the certificate of my graduation from the Academy as proof that I did indeed have a clean record. I did not wave it around, I handed it to the judge. The course was in conjunction with my work with the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs, under the supervision of then Police Commissioner Rocco Diina, and my city councilman __ . Incidentally, it was Councilman ____ who suggested to me that I institute harassment charges against Joan through Family Court.

    If the judge would not let me speak and present my case, why then would she grant me the Order of Protection against Joan.

 Page 365

Ms. Wheeler describes myself and my best friend as loudly proclaiming in the court that we were superior to her because we took the police course.

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Mixing up 2 different court cases. My friend did not take the course with me. My friend was not in the court in this case either. The date she accompanied me was in April 1995. As I did not attend the Academy until 1998, this could not have happened. At no time during the three court cases that I was involved in with Ms. Wheeler did I show any disrespect to any judge or court official, nor did I act out in court.

 Page 365

Ms. Wheeler describes me as throwing computer discs at her in the courtroom. She says her manuscript was on the hard drive of the computer and “it was clear that Brenda downloaded the files.”

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. When I was at her friend Carol’s house, Carol had told me that she had received as a gift, an old computer from Joan.. She had called Joan a week prior to come and take it back. Joan refused. Carol put it out on her back porch. She informed Joan that it was going in the garbage. When I came to her house, Carol gave it to me, as it was now her property and she could do what she wanted with it. She also gave me a box that contained computer discs. I brought them with me to the court and when Joan’s lawyer approached me to ask me a question, I gave the discs to him to give to Joan, as they were labeled as chapters of her book. I had not looked at the discs. Her manuscript was not on the hard drive of the computer, but on separate computer discs. And how can anyone determine if someone downloaded files by simply looking at a disc?

   As to me throwing things in a court room, if I had thrown computer discs at her in the court room, I would have been arrested for contempt of court. This did not happen, because I never disrespected the court, nor Joan.

 Part 2 of complaint of Ruth Sippel Pace

Re: book, Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler, published by Trafford

 Page 8

“We got drunk one night…Brenda picked up the phone…we were drinking and got silly. Brenda panicked…didn’t know what to do. “ “I remember that phone call, I didn’t know anyone by the name of Brenda. I heard giggles and the phone went dead.”

 I, Ruth called Joan at 1:30pm from Gert’s workplace, a dentist’s office, during a non-patient day, we knew Joan’s name, but not her address. I began calling Wheelers in the phone book. When Joan answered, I did not give my name at all. I did ask for Joan, did ask where she was at bowling the previous night. Joan asked what number did I want, I repeated her number but changed the last digit, Joan told me I had the wrong number, I apologized, said goodbye and ended the call. I was NOT drunk, nor panicky.

 Page 100 – time frame – 1974

“Two days before I left for college, Brenda took me to meet Aunt Doris…she lived 75 miles from Buffalo.”

 I, Ruth, did not know how to drive in 1974, did not learn to drive until 1976.

 Page 174 time frame 1978

“I had Momma’s wedding dress for only four weeks. … my anger at my sisters and father got the better of me. I drove to Brenda’s house. I threw it (the dress) at her.”

 I loaned Ms. Wheeler the dress for the purpose of her having it cleaned and some minor sewing repairs done in the year 1978. She did not return it to me until late 1983, after many pleadings from me to return it. I finally had to ask my father to intervene. Ms. Wheeler brought the dress to my father’s house where I picked it up. The cleaning and repairs were never done.

 Page 186 time frame 1980,

Ms. Wheeler wanted to go public with her adoption story.

“Brenda called and said she was uncomfortable.”

 Lie. In 1980 or 1981, I accompanied Ms. Wheeler to WGRZ television studios to be interviewed by reporter Rich Kellman on our separation and reunion.

 Page 257

“I didn’t want to live in a trailer park to become trailer trash.”

 Bigotry, hate language, value judgment on people who live in trailer parks. 

 Page 263.

 Ms. Wheeler is quoting my father about my father’s second wife, being taken in an ambulance to the psych center. Supposedly he told Ms. Wheeler the arrangements were made for the ambulance to come around noon on a school day, and we kids were coming home for lunch.

“The ambulance attendants took her away in front of the kids.”

 The arrangements that were made were that we kids were picked up at school by social workers and taken to the foster home, so that WE WOULD NOT SEE OUR STEPMOTHER TAKEN AWAY SCREAMING IN AN AMBULANCE. We kids NEVER witnessed this. My father would NOT have made arrangements for this to occur as we were coming home from lunch, as he protected us.

 Page 270 time frame 1988

Ms. Wheeler describes in 3 paragraphs a funeral of my maternal aunt. She says that her adoptive mother attended the funeral. Ms. Wheeler describes my maternal uncle snubbing my father at the funeral and a conversation in the car with my father reminiscing about my mother, “I lost my wife and that man still blames me. How could I stop her from dying?” Then Ms. Wheeler quotes her adoptive mother as giving sage advice to my father about life and dying.

 I was at the funeral. Ms. Wheeler’s adoptive mother did NOT attend the funeral. My uncle may have snubbed my father, they did not get along. I was in the car. My father did NOT say this about my mother. My father very rarely talks about my mother. Ms. Wheeler’s adoptive mother did not give advice to my father in the car, as she was not there.

 Pages 276, 277, 278

Ms. Wheeler describes a fictitious account of her friend Dr. Rene Hoksbergen coming to my house and talking to me about adoption. In these pages, Ms. Wheeler describes me and my husband as exchanging dirty looks, portrays  me as a wild-woman, jumping up and down, waving my arms in the air, screaming at Dr. Hoksbergen and Ms. Wheeler. She also describes Dr. Hoksbergen lecturing me as though I were a child.

 Dr. Hoksbergen NEVER came to my house, and this incident NEVER took place.

 Page 277

“Oh Brenda,” I said, casting a disgusted look at her. “You’re just pissed off because you were trying to get pregnant and couldn’t. Just because you were using a fertility clinic to get pregnant with your partner, something I didn’t know when I wrote my article against sperm donors, doesn’t mean what I wrote is directed at you.”

 Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Invasion of privacy of Ruth Sippel Pace. (what does my not getting pregnant have to do with Joan’s life?) Hate language, insensitivity to infertile women, as well as a blatant lie. This speech never happened. But, I was not pissed off because I couldn’t get pregnant. Hurt, yes. Also I never went to a fertility clinic. I never objected to any article that Ms. Wheeler wrote about sperm donors.

 Pages 296, 297, 298  time frame 1992

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene at a Fourth of July outing in a local park with my father, my brother, my sister Gert McQueen and myself, where Gert and I are supposedly mocking her.

“Heh, she’s useless.” My sisters said sarcastically.

“Yes,” my father continued. “and I want you to know that we want you, Joan, to stop living in the past. You don’t need to be writing about adoption in the newspaper. You should find something worthwhile to do with your life. Taking care of children and writing aren’t getting the bills paid. Look at the others. They’ve done things with their lives. Where are you?”

Ms. Wheeler continues with a description of insults from Gert and “more giggling.”

 This is all totally untrue. Ms. Wheeler continues to the middle of page 298 with the description of this totally fictitious scenario. Ms. Wheeler describes a get-together at my father’s house that she was not invited to. There was no get-together, as my stepmother was at her daughter’s house celebrating her grand-daughters third birthday. Ms. Wheeler knew about this party as she was complaining about it to me on the phone the day before.

 Pages 299, 300

Ms. Wheeler describes a conversation that she had with her mother about the fictitious scene on pages 296-298.

 Character assassination of Leonard Sippel, (my father) Gert McQueen and Ruth Sippel Pace

I did not witness such a conversation, but it could not have happened has the “ridiculing” of Joan never occurred. Ms. Wheeler describes her mother as saying that we sisters started the family gathering in the park. In reality, my dance troupe was booked as performers for the Friendship Festival months in advance by our leader, M. W. with the Buffalo and Erie County Arts Council and The Buffalo Parks Department. As a coincidence, my brother came to town to visit. It was our father who suggested we meet at the park for a small reunion. My neice’s third birthday party was also scheduled with no thought of insulting Joan, her mother, or her husband.

 Page 308

“…my sisters wrote harassing letters in the months after our family reunion of 1992.”

Ms. Wheeler, in italics, presents a narrative that is attributed to have been written by Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace.

 Lies; character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace.

We never wrote harassing letters to Ms. Wheeler.

The letter that Ms. Wheeler attributes to us was never written by any of us three sisters. We believe that Ms. Wheeler wrote this narrative to make it seem that we three sisters “ganged up” on her.

 Page 309

“Why did they attack my work in the Adoption Reform Movement?”

 Lie. We never attacked her work in any adoption reform movement.

 Page 310

Ms. Wheeler continues, in italics, her false narrative of a letter supposedly written by us three sisters. — “My sisters included copies of the long, handwritten letters they wrote to the nine adoption reform movement organizations in the United States at the time. My sisters slandered me in an attempt to ruin my credibility as an advocate for adoption reform.”

   Out of desperation, I called one adoption leader, Joe Soll, Director of the Council of Equal Rights in Adoption in New York City. Yes, he received my sister’s hateful letters.”

 Lies, character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis, Ruth Sippel Pace and Joe Soll.

In an email exchange in May 2010 between Gert McQueen and Joe Soll, Mr. Soll denies ever receiving: 1. a letter from any or all of us sisters; 2. a telephone call from Ms. Wheeler regarding this letter. In his email, Mr. Soll says that what is written about him in the book is “patently false.”

 Page 311

“Harassment from my three older sisters continued… Hate mail arrived at my house…” Ms. Wheeler quotes her ex-husband as saying to her “You’re crazy just like your sisters.”

 Lies, character assassination of Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Ruth Sippel Pace

We sisters did not send harassing hate mail to her.

 Page 312

“My sisters telephone my house morning, noon and night and in the middle of the night when most people are asleep. My young children often answered the phone and I heard my sisters – their aunts – yelling obscenities at them.”

 Lies. We did not call her house. We did not yell obscenities at her children.

 Page 312, 313

Ms. Wheeler lists obscene language and attributes this language to us.

“You f.. B….”  “You w….”  “You a….. . You f…. c….” “P… on you, you m…-f…”

 Lies. Obscene and pornographic language.

 Page 359

Ms. Wheeler in italics relates a fairly decent letter that she attributes to have written to our brother. I have never seen the original, so I have no way of knowing if what she writes here is true. But in this letter, she tells our brother “…my mother and my children and I are still hounded by harassing mail and phone calls from Brenda and company.”

Returning to the book, Ms. Wheeler then writes “I sent a similar letter to my sisters. I added that whatever they had against me needed to be talked out, resolved, so we could be a family again.”

 Lies, character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace. Slander of Ruth Sippel Pace to her brother.

The letter that I received from Ms. Wheeler was not nice. It was to accuse me of harassing her that her son saw me drive past their house. Which was impossible, because I did not have a car at that time. A few days later I got another letter from Joan. It was to inform me, falsely, that my husband had gotten the next-door neighbor pregnant. – The house was vacant. See DOCS 08 and 09. Read those letters and see if you can find the sentence “whatever they had against me needed to be talked out, resolved, so we could be a family again.”

 Page 359, 360

“My sisters retaliated with yet more hate mail and vicious phone calls. Brenda and her best friend, a tough streetwise woman from the West Side, got in on the act and telephoned my mother, yelling obscenities…Mom held the phone to her ear and mind. I’d hear Brenda’s voice and her best friend’s voice, shouting at us. … “A year of hate mail followed. The envelopes had disguised handwriting and no return address so the police couldn’t trace the mail.”

 Lies. Character assassination of Ruth’s friend.

No phone calls were made by me or my friend to Joan or her mother. No hate mail was sent to Joan.

 Page 360

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene in a grocery store where my friend accosted her and swore at her.

 Lies, obscene language. My girlfriend lived on the East Side of Buffalo, Ms. Wheeler lives in a northern suburb of Buffalo, where she does her grocery shopping. My friend did not have a car, and wouldn’t drive 5 or 6 miles to a grocery store, when there was one less than a mile from her house. Telling sign this is a lie: Ms. Wheeler does not say that she went to a security guard at the store, or even called the police.

 Page 360

Ms. Wheeler involves my cousin Gail, who at the time was battling cancer and going through a divorce. Ms. Wheeler describes taking her car to be repaired and the repair person was one of my cousins, who I had not seen for more than 20 years. Ms. Wheeler says “exactly 10 days later, an anonymous envelope … arrived in the mail….I knew it was Brenda. (the envelope supposedly contained an defaced article about adoption reform).

 Lies. I did not send her any envelope with any article on adoption reform.

 Page 360, 361

Joan describes her sending me a letter begging me to stop bothering her and then I called her on the phone..

 Lies. I did not receive any letter from Joan at this time, nor did I call her.

 Page 365, 366 time frame 1999

Ms. Wheeler describes a falling out she had with my step aunt and uncle and attributes that falling out to me gossiping about her.

 Lies, I had not seen, nor spoken to my step aunt and uncle since about the early 1980’s.

 Page 366

Ms. Wheeler describes herself and her mother being “barraged by harassing phone calls. I recognized the voices as being Brenda and her best friend…”

 Lies, my friend and I did not call her house.

 Page 370

Ms. Wheeler shows a photocopy of a letter she received in the mail that contains pornographic language. She accuses me of sending this to her. It is not my handwriting.  She also blames my friend. Further she states “their language reflected the lifestyles they had chosen.”

 Lies, slander. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace and her freind Hate language directed towards Ruth Sippel Pace and her friend. My lifestyle includes a 38 year career as a Patient Care Associate/Nurse Aide at Buffalo General Hospital; organizer and leader of a block club on my street; member of the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs, which entailed meetings with local elected officials and police officers; being a VIABLE volunteer with the Buffalo Police Department; I am a former professional Middle Eastern Dancer, former board member of the Beledi Club, an organization for Middle Eastern dancers, and Buffalo and Erie Arts Council. In my job I served on various committees designed to improve delivering quality patient care; I have worked in the following departments in my long career at the hospital: Medical Intensive Care Unit, Respiratory Care Unit, Hospice Unit, Kidney Transplant Unit, as well as various medical/surgical units. Due to my work as a neighborhood activist, I organized a rodent containment petition from the 4 streets surrounding my home, (of which I own, one mortgage having been completely paid off, a second mortgage obtained to replace roof), delivering the petition to the mayor of Buffalo, NY. In 1997 when the Newburgh Coalition of Block Clubs obtained an empty storefront to use as their offices, my husband and I volunteered many hours to provide manual labor, such as installing drywall, painting walls and furniture. As members of the Coalition, I contributed to the monthly newsletter, and helped with the production and distribution of the newsletters, and attended monthly meetings of the Coalition, and did volunteer work at the Coalition Carnival.

 I have attended meetings of the Buffalo Common Council, The Niagara Frontier Transit Authority (to help improve public transportation in Buffalo and the surrounding area), organized neighborhood clean-up drives, block parties on National Night Out. Because of much of my civic volunteering, I have been urged by many people to enter local politics. I include in my personal friends, the director of a well known local art center, several local elected officials, two well-known noted cardiologists, one internal medicine physician, one urologist and two other doctors who I have known since their days as interns in the hospital. I maintain friendships with many registered nurses and other nurses aides. I also trained as a union steward in my local labor union representing nurses aides: SEIU 1199, but eventually turned down the appointment of union steward. This does not deter many nurses aides, as well as registered nurses to approach me on advice on our union contract.

  For the past 10 years, I also have supervised the production of a bi-monthly newsletter of a local Star Trek fan club, of which two years ago, I became the head of. For this group, I have helped organize local Star Trek conventions and manned tables at conventions, greeting fans and Star Trek celebrities alike. I have formed several personal friendships with some Star Trek celebrities. I will not “name-drop” here, and I only mention my friendships with these celebrities, local politicians and health care professionals to point out that I am far from the foul-mouthed ghetto trash that Ms. Wheeler portrays me as in her book.

 My friend has trained as para-legal and also has had many accomplishments in her life.  We are highly insulted to have been labeled as foul-mouthed, ghetto trash.

 Page 375

Ms. Wheeler describes a scene that happened during my cousin Gail’s wake. She alleges that “Dad asked me to make peace Brenda. I approached Brenda with an outstretched hand to shake her hand. ‘I’m sorry for your loss,’ I said. Brenda ran away from me, waving her arms in the air. Through her tears she managed to flash an intense angry glare at me.”

 Lie. Ms. Wheeler did approach me at the wake, calling my name. I ignored her, trying to keep the peace. She called me again. I turned and said “What?” Ms. Wheeler said, “I’m sorry, I know how much Gail meant to you.” I put my hand up to stop her. She was 10 feet away from me. I told her to just leave me alone. I burst into tears and did run out of the funeral home, and my husband and my father both followed me outside. My husband held me and my father said “Joan should not have said anything to you. I will talk to her.” I told my father, “Tell her to leave me alone. Just tell her to leave me alone.”

 Page 381

Ms. Wheeler describes looking at my personal photo albums that I brought to Arizona to attend my brother’s funeral. She recognizes where I had cut her pictures out of my personal photo album.

 This is the basis of her accusation that I had sent her those pictures. I had not – I had thrown the pictures in the garbage.

 Page 382

Ms. Wheeler describes another guest at my brother’s house as objecting to my having my sibling’s birth certificates in my personal photo album.  Ms. Wheeler has woman saying she is a government worker and is telling me that I have these birth certificates illegally.

 Lies. There was no guest at my brother’s house who was a government worker. I obtained my siblings birth certificate legally at Buffalo City Hall by showing proper identification and paying a fee of $35.00 for each birth certificate. As I noted in my introduction, throughout the book, Ms. Wheeler puts words into other people’s mouth, those words usually are her own thoughts and she does this to lend credence to her fantasy that people agree with her on the topic she is writing about. This is one example. Ms. Wheeler cannot obtain HER original birth certificate because she doesn’t have proper identification as a SIPPEL. Therefore she is angry because I do have the proper credentials to obtain SIPPEL birth certificates. To lend credence to her argument that I have the documents illegally, she picks another guest at the house and like a ventriloquist, she writes what she thinks the guest will look good saying in the book.

    The information I was gathering is for the purpose of having a complete family tree. The birth certificates are kept together with my mother’s death certificate. This information is that which used to be included in pages of a family’s bible. This sort of information gathering on families has been done for centuries. Incidentally, NO ONE in the family has objected to my having my siblings birth certificates. My father looked at my photo album while in Arizona, as well as my sister-in-law and my brother’s son. They all saw the birth certificate of my brother, and no one had any objection.

 Page 382

Ms. Wheeler continues her rant about my having my siblings birth certificates and notes that I did not have my younger half-brother’s birth certificate in my photo album. She states “I made a mental note of the deeper meaning in Brenda’s chopped up photo album. This was her attempt to make sense out of her…severed family life.”

 Lie, personal misguided interpretation of someone else’s thoughts. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

How does Ms. Wheeler know what is in my thoughts? I object to having someone publishing their interpretations of my thought processes published in a book. The reason my younger brother’s birth certificate was not in my photo album was because I had not obtained it at that time, due to time and financial restraints. I did obtain it a few years later and it is in my photo album right now. As to the “chopping up” of my photo album, I had just begun in the year 2002 to obtain the documents and actually organizing my photos. They were in boxes, and now were in albums. And my photo albums are even more chopped up now – I have scanned into my computer a full album’s worth of photos, documents and greeting cards into my computer. And those that I have not given away, or put away to be given to other family members, have been shredded and destroyed. I have done all the work up to the year 1970. If Ms. Wheeler saw my photo albums today with no physical evidence of anything prior to 1970, she would put forth the misguided diagnosis that I have tried to destroy my life prior to 1970. Ms. Wheeler did not ask me WHY my photo album was “chopped up” to include the true reason as to why some things were missing from the album, in her book and she certainly did not obtain my permission to put her interpretations of my life and thoughts into her book. I fail to see what MY goal of scanning into my computer a complete family tree and history of our family has to do with HER adoption and adoption reform work.

 Page 383

Ms. Wheeler describes me as looking at a picture of her son and giving a disgusted grunt and turning away from his picture.

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

 I looked at the picture, nodded, and said, “Mmm.” I was trying to keep the peace by remaining silent. And this is also indicative of Ms. Wheeler’s contradictory attitude towards my thoughts and words and behaviors. If I do or say something regarding her or her children, husband or adoptive mother, or anyone else for that matter, she jumps on me. If I don’t say anything, thinking that by remaining silent I will keep the peace, Ms. Wheeler interprets my silence as haughtiness or a refusal to acknowledge her presence. If I acknowledge her presence, she psycho-analyzes my words and deeds and always finds me in the wrong. In Ms. Wheeler’s eyes, I am damned if I do anything and damned if I don’t do anything. Read the book you published – you will see almost every other page is an attack on Brenda. “Brenda did this, Brenda did that. Brenda DIDN’T do this, Brenda DIDN’T do that.” I can’t win no matter what I do or don’t do. Her hatred of me jumps right off the pages of this book.

 Page 383

Ms. Wheeler describes my husband (Larry in the book) as telling her that I found her “children’s photos in his wallet and yelled at him that she didn’t want him to have anything to do with me and that included cutting off ties with my children.’

 Lie. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace.

 Ms. Wheeler has no way of knowing of any personal conversation I had my husband.  But I did tell him that I did not want him going to Joan’s house because of the trouble she was causing me. He continued to go there to visit with the children. I also repeated my request on July 31, 1993, when he went to her house to help the family move. She over heard me say this to him, and twists the truth around to make me look as though I were a spying shrew, hen-pecking my husband. 

    I don’t look in my husband’s wallet. I did know of the pictures of Ms. Wheeler’s children in his wallet, because my husband showed them to me. And they are still there. I have scanned into my computer those photos only about six months ago, and my husband returned the pictures to his wallet in front of me. As to the subject of “chopping up” photos, Ms. Wheeler needs to answer for her own crime, to which she admits to in the book on page 358:

“once a month or so, I scrambled through the house, bagging up my children’s personal belongings, toys, books, gifts, even Russian nesting dolls I’d given my daughter – and threw them away….During these rages I screamed at my children as if I hated them.”

And she told a cousin of ours two years ago that she her own children’s photos, toys, school work, art work, IN FRONT OF HER OWN CHILDREN.  (of course she didn’t put that in the book).  If her narration in the book of me yelling at my husband for him having photos of her husband or cutting her out of my personal photo album is supposed to be a crime, she is way more guilty than I ever could be. Again, we see where Brenda (supposedly) does (almost) the same thing that Ms. Wheeler does, and should burn in hell for it, whereas Ms. Wheeler is an angel.

 Page 385

Ms. Wheeler describes me as hugging her at the side of our brother’s casket. “We hugged as we sobbed. But her arm dropped as suddenly as she reached out. That would be the last hint of love between us.”

 Half Lies. Character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace

 I did reach out to her. She was standing to my right. I did reach out with my right arm and put it over her shoulder and drew her to me. I do not recall how long I held her. I was grieving my brother and naturally reached out to my sister. Again we see Ms. Wheeler’s psycho-analyzing my every move. If I hung on to her too long, I suppose she would say that I was accepting her back into my life, which I don’t want. I only wanted to comfort her over the death of our brother. In simply reaching out to her in my grief, I showed that I didn’t hate her. And this was only 3 weeks after my meltdown at my cousin Gail’s funeral.

 Page 388

Ms. Wheeler describes an email exchange between regarding actions on a family photo web site I was building.

“Then I made the mistake of bringing up the past in a private email to Brenda. She flew into a rage, wrote me back saying the website was no place to discuss family dirty laundry, even though I didn’t post my email on the website. … I responded by terminating the email account I opened just for communicating with Brenda.”

 Lies. Twisting of the facts.

In 2003, I did build a website. At our brother’s house in Arizona, Ms. Wheeler and I exchanged emails. I needed her email to send an invitation to her to the website. In order to be a member of the website, members DID have to provide the website with their email. Everything was going fine from October 2003 to December 2003. Ms. Wheeler posted a photograph that had my two oldest sisters as children with Santa Claus. Ms. Wheeler had the wrong year on it. I corrected the year. Also moved the photo to the proper forum. As I knew the correct year and as the owner of the site, I had the right to do this. In January 2004, it was Ms. Wheeler who flew into a rage because I had “tampered” with her photo, and accused me of plotting against her. At this time, I did not own a computer of my own. I was doing all online work on public computers. When Ms. Wheeler sent the angry email to me, I was sick for a week and not able to get to a computer. The email got buried. I saw it in April 2004, and could not believe the nonsense. For three months, we were getting along, building a family photo website, (which should dispel any erroneous conclusions that I was trying to make sense out of my severed life, as she puts forth on page 382. (see what I mean about her contradictory interpretations of me? And how she contradicts herself in her own book?). I did answer her email as soon as I saw it. I asked her why was she bringing up the past – why can’t we just go forward? I never said anything about posting family dirty laundry on the website or in my email – (I still have the actual email exchange that proves what she said to me, and my response). 

 Page 389

Ms. Wheeler quotes my father as saying “Education, that’s what I needed….if I had more education, I would have kept you. … if I had education, none of this would have happened.  If someone would have told me how to keep you.“

 Lies. Character assassination of Leonard Sippel

Although I was not present to hear this conversation, I know my father would not, COULD not have said this. My father WAS educated. He worked as a civil engineer/draftsman in Buffalo’s City Hall in the Streets Department. (Ms. Wheeler portrays him as an uneducated laborer, working as a machinist in the book). Ms. Wheeler is insinuating here that if my father was better educated he would not have given her up for adoption. It wouldn’t have mattered. The bare fact is that whatever level of education my father had, whatever occupation he had, he still would have had to go to work everyday to earn money to support his family. He could not do this with an infant. There were no daycare centers in 1956, nor welfare system as we have today. Nor was any family member able to help out. My father’s hands were tied. It is Ms. Wheeler’s continual refusal to face these facts that has her once again, putting words into people’s mouths to support her delusions and fantasies.

 Page 393

Ms. Wheeler discusses her mother sharing photographs of her with her aunts and says: “…my aunts gave these pictures to my natural mother’s sister.”

 Lie. My aunt Catherine had only ONE photograph of Joan, taken of her First Holy Communion.

 Page 423

“…my sisters and brother suffered serious, extended childhood trauma. These facts resulted in them imposing trauma on me…”

 Lies; speculation on MY childhood experiences; character assassination of Ruth Sippel Pace, Gert McQueen, Kathy Inglis and Leonard Sippel Jr.

These are NOT facts, these are Ms. Wheeler’s statements due to her personal faulty interpretation of our childhood, of which she did not share. Ms. Wheeler is not trained as a doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist or any where in the medical field. She has a degree in social work, but as she has never worked as such, she has no experience in the field. Also, I was never interviewed by a qualified child psychologist (much less Ms. Wheeler) in a medical or similar setting about my childhood. What are Ms. Wheeler’s qualifications to pronounce judgment on MY mental health, my childhood, my life experiences? Or my siblings? And she has no right to publish her OPINIONS on this matter concerning me or my family. I would suggest anyone reading this paragraph read again my life accomplishments, (listed above) and consider my lack of any substance abuse, criminal record or any other anti-social behavior. Read The Book and read Ms. Wheeler’s own admissions of her anti-social behavior, alcoholism, thoughts and threats of suicide.

 Page 490

Ms. Wheeler is describing my father (her natural father)

“Poor, advanced to working class 1950’s, advanced to middle-middle class in 1970’s.”

 Lies, character assassination of Leonard Sippel

Ms. Wheeler does NOT portray the true facts about her own natural father, my father.

My father started work for the City of Buffalo in Street Paving Department as a civil-engineer/draftsman on July 20, 1953 and maintained that position until his retirement on September 17, 1988. From 1965 to 1970, he also maintained a part time second job as salesman at Sears. In 1965, he bought a house, the first in his family to own property. He also had 4 teenagers at home, which in the 1960’s, as well as today, is an expensive obligation. Kids and houses are NOT cheap. My father married his third wife in October 1970, and after having a child with him (along with her two daughters from a previous marriage), went back to work as a nurse’s aide in 1972. I was also employed as a nurse’s aide and lived at home and helped take care of the children. The reason my father “advanced to middle-middle class in the 1970’s was because for the first time in his life, he was a member of a two-income family (actually three-income, when I was there 1972 – 1974).  My father sold his house in 1975 and took a spacious apartment. The rent was cheaper than the mortgage and all the expenses related to owning a house. This also helped his financial status.

 Page 491

Ms. Wheeler is discussing my father’s second wife.

“How this step-mother was removed from the home, in front of her son and step-children was a form of cruelty to her and emotional trauma to the children. Witnessing their mother and step-mother being carried away in a straight-jacket had lasting effects on them.”

 Lies. We children NEVER witnessed this. I myself did not learn of her being taken away in a straight jacket until about 15 years when my sister Gert told me about it. What happened was – my stepmother was having severe mental problems. My father told me once that she was examined by a doctor and it was decided that she should be placed in the psychiatric hospital in Buffalo. He told me that it was all arranged and the day she was placed there, social workers came to our school and picked up us children and took us to the foster home (Gert and Kathy) and the orphanage (me and my brothers).  My father was with me and my brothers – I remember him holding my hand as we entered the orphanage run by the Catholic nuns and the huge statue of St. Joseph welcoming us. Gert was about 12 at the time. She told me about 15 years ago, that when she was about 17 or 18, she went back to our old neighborhood to visit some old friends and the mother of one of our childhood friends (who lived across the street from us) told her of the day that our step-mother was placed in the ambulance, in a straight jacket, and she was screaming. All the neighbors witnessed it and they all said it was sad, but were glad that we children were not around to see it. Even the times that my stepmother came home from the psych center and me and my brothers came home from the orphanage, our landlord, landlady, and neighbors NEVER told us what happened. As I said, I myself never knew about it until about 15 years ago (c 1995), much less witnessed it in 1959. Ms. Wheeler had been adopted out of our family in 1956, her family moved to Tonawanda, New York and was not there.

 Page 529, 530, 531, 532

Ms. Wheeler again is accusing me and my sisters of harassing her.

(529) “…their joint letter writing campaign after our family reunion in 1992. The following year they wrote lengthy letters to the major adoption reform organizations to tell them what an asshole I was.” (530) “…looking back, now I can see they are tortured souls.” (531) “Each one of my sisters had something to hide, something they did not want me to write about, which I have not written about. … They chose to harass and mock me, so I wrote about it.”  “Harassing my husband…Calling our home and yelling obscenities at the our young children. … Calling the home of my boyfriend…. Calling the Child Abuse Hotline and accusing my then 80 year old mother, and me, of sexual abuse.”

 All lies. Slander, threats.

Many of these lies have already been addressed. But now is added this new statement that each one of her sisters have something to hide. This implies a threat. I have no idea to what Ms. Wheeler is alluding to here. I have nothing to hide. As I stated above: I do not engage in criminal or anti-social behavior, do not abuse substances (I barely drink), I have had a long career as a health-care worker (38 years with the same employer), and have been involved in the performing arts and as a neighborhood activist. When I took a course at the Buffalo Police Academy, a background check was done on me, and nothing showed up. So just what is my secret that Joan Wheeler thinks she has over me?

 Page 531

“I wrote about my sisters, and anyone else, at the point where our lives intersected.”

 Lie. Falsely writing about me and my siblings witnessing my siblings witnessing our step-mother being placed in an ambulance is not a point where our lives intersected. As I stated above, Ms. Wheeler was adopted out of our family in 1956, and the event took place in 1959. Yes, the Wheelers did coincidentally lived one block over in 1956, then they moved three blocks away shortly after adopting her, and in 1957, they moved several miles away from us. Ms. Wheeler’s life did not intersect with ours until 1972, when I was placing phone calls to Wheelers in the phone book and her life did not fully intersect with ours until 1974 when we were physically reunited with her.

Even so, this “intersection” of our lives does not give her the right to violate our privacy and tell lies about us in this book.

 Page 532

Ms. Wheeler discusses our brother.

“Our sisters poisoned him against me for 11 years.”

 Lies, speculation.

We did not “gossip” to our brother about Joan.  And how does she even know a time duration for this? It was Joan herself who was calling him, writing letters to him and trashing us to him and his wife that turned him against Joan. He quite naturally became disgusted with having his sisters trashed. Proof – Ms. Wheeler admits to trashing us to him on page 359, as I have already addressed this issue. I repeat it:

page 359

Ms. Wheeler in italics relates a fairly decent letter that she attributes to have written to our brother. I have never seen the original, so I have no way of knowing if what she writes here is true. But in this letter, she tells our brother “…my mother and my children and I are still hounded by harassing mail and phone calls from Brenda and company.”


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, mental illness, Our Family History, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

first part from Gert McQueen, second part from Ruth Sippel Pace

I, Kathy Inglis, concur with what my two sisters say here.

from Gert
To Joan Wheeler, warning, take this very seriously…YOU ARE TO STAY AWAY FROM OUR AGED FATHER AND STEPMOTHER…by order of EVERY member of our family.

You are NOT to go to our father’s home, you are not welcomed there. Our father and his wife do not want you to call on the phone or knock on their door. You are not to go to any hospital where either of them may be for any reason…you are not allowed in their presence.

If you go again, like you did on Tuesday Jan 4, 2011 sometime between the hours of 11am and 6pm, the police shall be called to have you removed and charged with harassment and taking advantage of sick and weak elders.

Your adoptive mother’s end stage of her life is next to nothing of consequences to our father and his wife and the rest of our family. If you, Joan, are dreading the death of your adoptive mother and ‘want to make peace with dad’ that is YOUR PROBLEM, not theirs! They and everyone else gave you almost 37 years of chances to make peace. You had your chances and you blow them, not once, but many many times…And after you published this rotten disgusting piece of shit against every family member you have the gull to ask to ‘make peace with dad’!!

How many times do you need to insult Dad and get kicked out before you GET IT? You want to ‘make peace with dad’! Do you mean -peace like in what you did and said in your book…spring of 2008 pg 553 – 556 and Feb 2009 pgs 557 – 559. Is that the kind of ‘make peace with dad’ bullshit that you want now!! (Ruth’s note – see explanation just below)

You, Joan, are a lying piece of sick shit! And if you come near MY FATHER again the police shall be called. Get it! I hope so, for your sake!

Go and deal with your adoptive mother’s dying and what will be left of your pathetic life when she is gone, because you ‘are dreading her death…dreading it’!

Your life is what you made it, now go and live your life with the demons that you wrought and leave us alone!

Ruth’s note: to clarify to what Gert is alluding to – what Joan wrote in her filthy book –
A few years ago, after my father had open heart surgery, Joan VOLUNTEERED to take my elderly father and my elderly stepmother to their doctor appointments. A couple years later, Joan DEMANDED gas money from my father, then DEMANDED he chip in for car repairs. When he refused to be held to financial and emotional blackmail, Joan goes home and tells her mother, who trashed my father for HER past financial decisions. THEN Joan writes about this shit in her book. Yet towards the front of the book has the nerve to quote the fourth commandment “honor thy mother and thy father.” And you know what the beef Joan’s mother had? Because when she adopted Joan in 1956, she had to give up her job to take care of an infant. BUT when Joan was older – did she she go out and get another job? NO! So she sits and whines that MY father had the benefit of a working wife (but not until 1972 Dorothy, like your daughter – you don’t get your facts straight).  So this bitch is putting MY father down, and Joan puts it in her book. Dorothy also is bitching that SHE raised his daughter and now HE owes her! Excuse me, bitch when you signed the adoption papers YOU became the legal parent and guardian of that child. If you didn’t want to accept the financial responsibility of that child you should not have adopted her. BUT guess what folks? Edward Wheeler worked at Dunlop tires, making a pretty good penny! AND the Wheelers owned their own house in the suburbs AND had TWO MORE RENTAL PROPERTIES! It is not MY father’s problem that the Wheelers did not do a better job planning for their financial future. And that includes Joan. She should have been working all this time and putting money into a retirement fund instead of blowing all her money on bullshit. – and I have lot more to say on that subject in future installments of this blog.

Joan pulled that shit on me back in 1990 – I fronted the down payment and lawyer’s fees for real estate, in a joint checking account – to be used for closing costs, expenses for real estate, but Joan withdrew money without my permission (stealing) for HER living expenses. That was not what I agreed to loan the money to her for. Bitch. The money was to buy an apartment building NOT for Joan to live off. and she even says in the book “the money disappeared.” Disappeared? MY money disappeared? She was withdrawing small amounts to buy hamburgers in the mall (and she had the nerve to “treat” me to one), paying her cable bill with premium channels like HBO while John and I had only basic cable – Joan living high on MY money! SCAM ARTIST! I do not work to support Joan or her kids. And her husband was withdrawing money to blow at a strip joint. Then caused their rent check to bounce. Joan and Colby – thieves, scums, deadbeats, liars – but can go to rock concerts, but don’t pay the electric bill, when they got toddlers at home – blow Ruth’s money on shit and act all surprised when Ruth gets mad.

So I was out almost $900.00 and Joan wonders why I’m mad – and 20 years later, she tries to pull the same scam on my father! And my father knew what Joan did to me and put his foot down and wasn’t about to be fooled by Joan’s tears. So  for revenge – she trashes my father in her book.
This is Joan’s way of honoring my father – holds him hostage to her and her mother’s lifetime of bad financial planning and spending habits, then further dishonors him by putting that shit in her book.  And of course while she writes about this shit, she automatically HAS to include a dig against me. Because I didn’t drive my dad around – and she did. Well, I have a JOB, Joan doesn’t. I work the night shift and sleep in the day. And I had another post open heart surgery person to take care – my husband. He had his surgery 3 months before my father. And I had to put in overtime to make up for his lost income. did Joan ASK me why I wasn’t taking my dad to the doctor? NO – she doesn’t do any dam research for her book – but just includes her flawed INTERPRETATIONS of someone’s actions and passes them off as a truth in her lying book. – and she trashed my younger brother because he owned a motorcycle, not a car, so he couldn’t take my dad to the doctor. So SAINT Joan is taking my dad to the doctor and oh boo-hooo, she gets no gratitude, SAINT Joan is sooo good and pure and the rest of the family aren’t taking him to the doctor – oh puh-leaze! How does someone dare to demand money from an elderly person after VOLUNTEERING to drive them? You can make arrangements with them – by saying, “I have the time to take you to the doctor or shopping, but I’ll need help with the gas money.” No problem with that! But to DEMAND money?  NO, that’s stepping over the line.  btw, my Dad offered to pay for MY speeding ticke in 2003, when I was on the way to his house when he asked me to take him shopping once. I said “No, it was MY foot on the gas pedal, not yours.” It’s called personal responsibility Joan – and I see you still haven’t learned that – you didn’t learn a dam thing after you scammed me and then you try to scam an elderly person – you’re an elder abuser – you slapped your elderly mother once – but you aren’t going to do that to MY father.



I, Ruth Sippel Pace, being of sound mind and body, and being the LEGAL daughter of Leonard J. Sippel Sr. concur with Gert McQueen’s demands above. Also, J.R., our step-sister-turned LEGAL sister through adoption, and the LEGAL and biological daughter of Gi. S., hold Power of Attorney and she made it clear to Gert via telephone January 6, 2011 that she does not want Joan Wheeler near her parents. Also at that time, G. S. told Gert via tselephone that she does not want Joan near her or her husband. I concur with her wishes.

Also, on or about November 15, 2010 my father called me on the phone to invite me to a family function. I asked him if Joan would there, and he said “No.” Then he added emphatically, “I am done with her. I don’t want to see her again.”

The reason: because of the last conversation she had with my father sometime in 2009, where Joan told my father to his face that she does not like people of Polish descent or Catholics. My father is of Polish descent. His mother’s parents emigrated from Poland. Our family is Roman Catholic, some members have converted to other religions, but those of us who have, still have great respect for the Roman Catholic Church.

Joan, in her own hand-written description of her trash book Forbidden Family says “….she (Joan) had to be silenced.” Alluding to people always telling her to shut up about adoption.

No, Joan doesn’t GET IT! She has not been told shut up about adoption, she has been told to shut up PERIOD! Joan suffers from diarrhea of the mouth. Once she gets started, she can’t stop. She also suffers from chronic gross exageration! If an actual event took 5 minutes, Joan reports it as 20 minutes. If she received ONE phone call, she reports it as 10.
Joan has never learned SELF-CONTROL. She cannot control her mouth. I have had philosophical and theological debates with my father, so has Gert, but we learned to do it in a respectful manner, and not insult my father’s mother or his birthright religion. Joan goes on the Adult Adoptees forum and fairly revels in the fact that she left an insulting comment on somebody else’s internet post. There are several instances in the book where she does the same thing. She insults people, then sits back and laughs at herself, and pats herself on the back  for her bad manners. She doesn’t care that what she said in person or in the book or on the internet may HURT another human being! In fact, she ENJOYS hurting other human beings. She is a straight-up bitch.

I have been personally hurt by Joan in person, by her lies about me in the book and her lies about me on the internet. I have been hurt to read my family being trashed in print in her book and on the internet.

So she insults and hurts my father’s feelings in 2009, and now all of a sudden, in January 2011, she comes running to my father’s house. Why? Because she is dreading the fact that her adoptive mother may leave this world? What does that have to do with my father?

Did Joan go to my father’s house to apologize for what she said in 2009? I doubt it. She has had almost 2 years to do so. She even wrote about it in her book, just prior to it’s publication in November 2009. She “explained” what she meant that by the anti-Polish remark, she was saying about the unique Polish descendants living in Buffalo and their accent. BUT she still insults THEM by implying that the accent denotes stupidity.

For those who don’t know of this accent, watch the 1993 Harrison Ford movie The Fugitive, where he is renting a basement apartment from a Polish lady. She may be in Chicago, but it is the same as in Buffalo. The actress doesn’t appear stupid to me. And neither do many of the Polish people that I know personally in Buffalo.

But we see that Joan is a bigot! It’s one thing to have a light-hearted laugh about an immigrant’s accent, as in the movie The Christmas Story, where the Chinese waiters are trying to sing the song Deck the Halls. Because there is no “L” in the Chinese language, when they try to say the L sound, it comes out as R. The scene in the movie does not depict the Chinese people as stupid, but caring people when you see them rush to feed their patrons.

This is where Joan fails in her conversational style. She is a bigot. She is judgemental. She wants to voice HER opinion. And if you disagree with her – you are worthless to her.

THIS is why we have all tried to tell her to WATCH WHAT YOU SAY JOAN. Because with her diarrhea of the mouth, she HURTS other people’s feelings. And after having their feelings hurt, several times, a person is just going to say “the hell with you, get away from me.”

Then Joan is left holding the bag and WILL NOT ACCEPT THAT IT IS HER OWN ACTIONS AND WORDS THAT HAVE CAUSED PEOPLE TO RUN THE HELL AWAY FROM HER AND BAN HER FROM THEIR HOUSE! ~~ addendum – January 9, 2011  ~~ and I, Ruth Pace am sick and tired of always being blamed for everything in Joan’s life. When a person who has had enough of Joan’s insults, does say “the hell with you (Joan), get away from me,” Joan automatically blames ME. Even if I hadn’t seen the person or spoke to them in 15 years! I have had enough! Whatever negative activity that happens in Joan’s life is NOT always RUTH’S fault. got that Joan – I simply do NOT have such a huge influence on YOUR life. I live my OWN life – go live yours and LEAVE ME OUT OF YOURS!

It is perfectly clear that Joan is NOT WANTED by any person in the Sippel family. Joan has hammered coffin nails into her relationships with the Sippel Family for years. The last hammering was the publication of that lying filthy book.

Now stand up and be a Woman – accept the consequences of your own dam actions Joan. You brought this shit on yourself.

1. Ruth – January 9, 2011
my father is generous – when John and I had financial difficulties, we asked him for help – and got it. AND made the attempt to repay him, which he refused to take – “you need the money more than me.”
Joan didn’t ask – she DEMANDED money. …then her mother trashes my father – and Joan puts it in her book. NOW she wants to get in good with my Dad? Why? Because she probably needs money!

2. Gert – January 10, 2011
from Gert
What Joan falls to understand is that events in other peoples’ lives are NOT about her…it’s about THEM.
Joan’s adopted mother’s life and death process is NOT about Joan…and Joan’s feelings about that woman and Joan’s fears about that woman’s death is NOT anyone’s issues…those are JOAN’S and she ought to take ownership of them and stop laying it on other people’s feet.

My father’s life is NOT about Joan, it is about HIM.

As with anyone else, when he is ill or weak or in the any reminding stage of HIS life…it is STILL ABOUT HIM and it is never about Joan. Joan has no right to inflict her own fears upon anyone else particularly my father.

When a person reaches advnced age or is on their death bed, the LAST THING they need is to have some mentally disturbed person, JOAN, begging, whinning, lying, crying, being hysterical, and asking to make peace.
 3. Ruth – January 10, 2011
I like what Gert says here: “Joan has no right to inflict her own fears upon anyone else…”
If Joan had kept a close and caring relationship with ANY of her birth family (or adoptive family or friends), than Joan would HAVE a support system – someone she could call at any time of the day or night and cry on their shoulder when a crises comes up. I know that I do. I have two very close loving people that I have known since 1978 – my best woman-friend and my other best friend – my husband. I have close friendships with people on my job – that thru the years have proven to have my back. I have relatives, some that I haven’t seen for years, but through the new phenomena of social networks like facebook, we have re-connected. One, just left a one word description of me (a little game being played on facebook). She described me as “beloved.” Even tho I haven’t seen her for about 30 years!

Why does Joan not have this kind of support system? Because she pushes everyone in her life AWAY from her with her bullshit and her insulting ways. As I said above – after a while, people get fed up with her, say “the hell with you” and they run away from her. Joan flatters herself too much in thinking that The Three Sippel Sisters, whether individually or collectively are “bad-mouthing” her left and right to EVERY single person that Joan knows. Because we just don’t have the time for that – I have a job, Gert and Kathy may be retired, but they are busy with their varied interests.

The problem with Joan (well ONE problem) is that she REFUSES to be an ADULT who takes responsibility for her own life! Everything bad in her life is NEVER because JOAN did something, but rather it is because Joan keeps BLAMING SOMEONE ELSE FOR IT. And that someone else, in Joan’s deluded mind is usually Ruth. As if I know all the people in her life. And even if I do, I am NOT on the phone 24/7 gossiping about Joan!

Joan, it has ALWAYS been YOU and YOU ALONE who have managed to turn one person after another against you – you give me too much credit that it has been MY fault that your friends have turned against you, your husband and other boyfriends have turned against you, relatives have turned against you. YOU ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT TO MY LIFE! I WANT YOU OUT OF MY LIFE! I HATE EVEN THE SOUND OF YOUR NAME! The only reason this blog is up and I am doing this now – is because you published that trash book that DISHONORED MY father, as well as me, and my WHOLE FAMILY! YOU wrote the lies in the book – YOU insulted my father’s mother – my grandmother – YOU insulted the Catholic Church, to which generations of MY ancestors and my father’s ancestors have belonged! RUTH didn’t write the book. JOAN did. RUTH didn’t insult people of Polish heritage – JOAN did. RUTH did not trash the Catholic Church – JOAN did.

Thoughts on Joan Wheeler, how I viewed her as a child and an adult, how I view her in the present December 20, 2010

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

by Ruth Sippel Pace — Here’s a recent tidbit of wisdom from Joan

Post by: joanmw on November 06, 2010, 04:05:28 PM

I was found at age 18. In a split second I had the shock of my life and I had to decide how to handle it. How was I gonna be the only child of two adoptive parents and be the middle child of ten in my natural family and make it work with two sets of parents? For me, I told myself I have two sets of real parents and tried to please them both.

That was in the 1970s.

Today,, my real mother is the one who was pregnant with me and birthed me. She died when I was three months old. Her husband is my real father because, well, he is.

The fatehr who raised me is my adoptive father. The mother who raised me is my adoptive mother. She’s still alive and I call her Mom, but the destinction is real. She did not give birth to me and that’s a fact. She did parent me and so did my adoptive father.

I also have a step mother who is currently married to my real father.

All of these people are real and cannot be denied in their exsistance.

Does the term real parent mean “who do I love”? In different ways, I love all of them. But it isn’t a feel-good love. It is a sad, angry and grief-filled  acknowldgement of what really happened.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Joan says “It isn’t a feel-good love” – can’t Joan just accept the people around her for what they are – people? And love them for themselves? Isn’t that the friggin’ whine she keeps saying about herself? That people should love and accept her? Why does she have to label people and mete out feelings that are “supposed” to be about that label.

At the age of 54, Joan hasn’t yet learned that human beings are complicated? And are deserving of love and affection for themselves based on what they bring to your relationship.

Yes, we all have a familial love for our relatives. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about the feelings we have with those with whom we have a relationship with.

I will use my stepmothers as an example. I was too young when my mother died to really understand what that meant. Shortly afterwards, my father married my first stepmother. Who had a bunch of problems of her own. My siblings didn’t get along with her. I did. I had a relationship with her. I loved her. She took care of me. Did things with me. I vividly remember her pushing me on the swing, playing with me, singing with me. I was a little kid. I adapted. This woman took care of me. Called me her daughter. Her mother called me her granddaughter. As I grew older, I began to realize that this woman was not my mother. She was my stepmother. My love for her did not diminish and I was genuinely upset when she died.

I was 18 when my father married again. I was old enough to accept this woman for who she was. A very nice woman. I was almost grown, didn’t need anyone to braid my hair anymore. Or teach me how to brush my teeth. Or wash behind my ears. But she did teach me other things. And I am eternally grateful to her. She became my friend. I will always love her for that. And yes, it is a “feel-good” love, because she’s been nice to me.

So getting back to Joan. And perhaps this history will clear up the mis-understanding and mis-labeling that we birth siblings of Joan are suffering from “separation anxiety” because she was taken away from us. I was 3 1/2 years old when my mother died. My brother was 5, Gert and Kathy were 8 and 9. There were no daycare centers in 1956, no welfare system, my dad had to go downtown to his job everyday to earn money for the rent and for groceries. (got that Joan?) Right after my mom died, I was living with my Uncle Mattie and Aunt Millie. I’m not sure where the others were. Then my dad married Josephine, and we all lived together. Well, not quite. It seems that Josephine had two sons. Her youngest, John, lived with us.Her oldest, Jimmy, lived with her mother. Why? Because Jimmy did not get along with my father. He was quite vocal about it. BUT he never disrespected any of us Sippel kids! I well remember his visits – he was just my big step-brother who didn’t live us, who lived with my Grandma Genovese and my Uncle Dominic and Aunt Helen, much like I used to live with Uncle Mattie and Aunt Millie.

When my stepmother showed signs of a nervous breakdown and went to the psych center, Gert and Kathy went to a foster home, me and my brothers to an orphan home for a year. Then we came home for a year. And I’m not sure why I was living with my paternal grandparents while I was in the first grade. My brother Butch was with me. But not Johnny. Nor Gert and Kathy. I was in the second grade at the orphan home and third grade when we all came home. Gert and Kathy stayed in the foster home. During the summer between my third and fourth grades, my stepmother flipped out again and I was sent to the same foster home as Gert and Kathy. The boys stayed with Dad, Jimmy was still with his grandmother.

So all this moving around, with one or two kids staying here, and other kids staying there, was quite NORMAL for us Sippel kids. The core group, Gert, Kathy, Butch, me, and Johnny all saw each other quite regularly. Jimmy, less regularly, but we knew he was around, and were pleased and excited when we did see him. Big step-brother Jimmy was aware of my fondness of art materials and always brought me play clay (not the Play-dough, but the better stuff), watercolors, brushes – stuff like that.

I don’t remember when I first aware that we had baby sister Doris laying around somewhere. And we wanted her with us. Why not? She was our sister. By the time I was 10 years old, I was quite aware of her, but she was “adopted” and her name had been changed. I didn’t quite understand that. By my mid-teens, I was fully aware of her status. I most certainly did NOT suffer from any sort of “separation anxiety” concerning Doris/Joan. MY separation anxiety problems stemmed from my being separted from my father. During my life, wherever I was living, whoever had custody of me, they always took good care of me, instilled good and proper moral values, and taught me skills. (Bible songs from Sunday School teacher Aunt Millie; some sort of embroidery from Josephine, hair care from my paternal grandmother, homemade spaghetti sauce from my grandmother Genovese, many skills from my foster parents, including gardening, pet care, rowing a boat and fishing!). Despite all this – I wanted to be with my daddy!

In the meantime, our Aunt Catherine had a photograph of Joan. It was given to her by her childhood friend, Helen, who’s brother Edward had adopted Joan. Contrary to Joan’s accusations of Aunt Catherine’s “stalking” her, (my god, how could she think of such a thing?), it was merely a photograph of the child of her dead sister’.  Catherine was in the hospital giving birth to her last child Gail, (March 4) while in another part of the hospital, her sister lay dying, and died March28. Catherine had Doris/Joan’s photo out of LOVE and rememberance of her dead sister, and her last child, who was adopted out and indeed FORBIDDEN to us, Catheirne included. She was NOT “stalking”Joan, she had a momento of her. For god’s sake Joan, can’t you see that we all LOVED you and MISSED you? We didn’t STALK you, you idiot.

Catherine and Helen were childhood friends. Their children all knew each other. One day in 1966, Catherine and Helen took their kids to Crystal Beach Amusement Park. Well, what do you know? On the same day, Dorothy Wheeler had brought Joan to Crystal Beach. My cousin Gail saw Joan and was confused. This girl looked like me, but she wasn’t a Sippel. After the mothers finished talking, and Aunt Catherine got Gail alone, she told Gail who Joan was, and that we Sippel kids didn’t know who Joan was or where she was. And Gail was never to tell us. And she never did. So much for Joan’s insistence that she had been stalked “all her life” or “since she was 10 years old” by us. We couldn’t have – We didn’t know her name or where she was.

It was when I was 20 years old, (Joan was 16), when Gert approached me and told me that for years she had seen that photograph of Joan, and gradually became self-aware that the photo was that of our lost sister Doris. She asked Aunt Catherine what her name was. Catherine told her Joan Wheeler. But would not tell Gert where she lived. We found that out by me calling Wheelers in the phone book. And it was only ONE phone call placed to Joan’s home – she was not the subject of multiple stalking phone calls or prank letters, as Joan reports. And then we waited until she was 18 years old – legal age – to contact her.

As to Joan saying she was stalked by this contact – well I wish she would make up her mind! She has always maintained that as she became a teen and was aware that she was adopted, when she gained the “maturity” (and I say this loosely because she shows very little maturity, even now at the age of 54) – by the time she was 16, she made the conscience decision to find her birthparents. She didn’t know at the time she had siblings, but I guarantee if she had, they would have been included in her decision to find her birth family. – So much for her saying that she was traumatized by us finding her and we had “separation anxiety” – after she made that conscience decision to find her birth family – she wanted us as much as we wanted her.

So what happened when we found her? For myself, I was quite happy to have her back in my life. In 1974, I was in my first apartment, learning all the new things a new “adult” does. I was making my own decisions in my life, learning all about my new freedoms to come and go as I please, do what I want with my life and my time. Making my own mistakes and learning from them. And yes, that included my new relationship with Joan.

Gert said in a recent comment, “Ruth tried so many times to be a sister to Joan.” Yes, I did. Joan was raised as an only child. I was not. I came from a large family. Even if we Sippel siblings weren’t always with each other, we were with other kids. Aunt Catherine’s kids were particularly close to us. My cousin Gail was more like a sister to me. My first stepmother’s nephews and neice (David, Anthony, Gina, Perry) were close to me. Anthony was around the same age as me and Johnny, and we always played together). So I had experience in being a sister, or at least being close to someone!

And that is what I tried to be. To be close with Joan. I welcomed her back into my life with open arms. And she admits this in her book! I grew to love her. And I didn’t base my love on a wish that my dead mother would be sort of re-incarnated. No, I loved Joan for who and what she was. My sister. Who was funny, talented, creative, shared an interest in Ancent Egypt and Star Trek with me, shared an interest in mysticism with me. Liked many of the same songs and rock groups and actors as I did. Liked many of the same movies as I did. Some things about her I didn’t understand. But I would bet there were some things about me she didn’t understand. But no matter – we got along just fine. Joan said in her book that we were in a reunion and nobody knew how to proceed. What’s the big deal? I knew how to proceed! I just accepted her! If I had a day off from work and was free – I called her up and we went out to a movie or something. Isn’t that we all just simply do with anybody in our lives? Why must Joan make everything so dam difficult and see fucking problems where no problems exist? I had NO problem with Joan whatsoever. I loved her.

Well what the hell happened? Apparently, Joan didn’t love me at all. Because by 1981, we started seeing things in Joan we didn’t like. Her being opinionated for one thing. Let me rephrase that – her being DISRESPECTFUL is what I mean. She would give her opinion of a situation – and nobody was allowed to have an opposing viewpoint! If you disagreed with Joan, she would argue with you, and you ended up feeling belittled, like your opinion or viewpoint had no value. And that is wrong, wrong, wrong, because every human being on this planet has worth. Just because they disagree with you, does not give you the right to devalue them their basic human right to a free opinion!

It took a few years – but after a while, this devalue-ing (is that a word?) of me took it’s toll. I began to lose respect for Joan. By 1983, I had very little respect for her, but there was still love there. I gave her another chance. She hurt me again in 1987, I gave her another chance. In 1990, she out and out stole money from me. By that time, I could give her no more chances. Or so I thought. I tried again in 1992. Nope, I got kicked in the teeth again. And then her vendetta against me started for real – harassing letters, lies, July 4 and 5, 1992, she tried THREE times to get me in trouble with my husband! (that will be documented in due time). Then she started sending stalking letters to my house, greeting cards to my husband, but the envelopes addressed to me, false police reports, and on and on and on and on. Phone calls to my job to get me fired, trashing me to car repair people who knew me.

I sure want to know what the hell I did to Joan Wheeler that made her want to do all these rotten things to me! Then in 1999, she sends me a letter asking me why I don’t like her. No, by this time, I didn’t just not like her, I no longer loved her. And it was Joan herself who killed any love I ever had for her.

I said it before – our Doris is dead and gone. We are left with Monster Joan. I loved the Joan of the 70’s. The Joan of the 80’s, the 90’s, the 2000’s – she is deserving only of my contempt. And it is due to her own actions.

1. Gert – December 21, 2010 
Well said Ruth!!!

Ruth said:
“I most certainly did NOT suffer from any sort of “separation anxiety” concerning Doris/Joan. MY separation anxiety problems stemmed from my being separted from my father.”

I can state, with full knowledge that this statement is the truth, that from where both I and Kathy stand and from our deceased brother Butch. We, four children suffered through the loss due to death of a mother and several placements, some healthy, some not so healthy for many many years and not having our father there for us when we needed him, because he was always so busy with earning a living to support us all. During the 10 years I lived in a foster home I was ALWAYS packed because Daddy was coming to take me home the following weekend. Joan was never in my thoughts.

At various times in each of our lives we knew about Doris/Joan…I knew more and I remember more because I was the oldest…but at NO TIME did I ever suffer from being separated from her…Joan flatters herself too much…she was not and is not the center of my soul and life…as a child it was my FATHER, as an adult it is with my FATHER that I had to come to terms with regarding events of my life and those of and in my family…it NEVER WAS WITH JOAN.

Ruth said:
“Apparently, Joan didn’t love me at all. Because by 1981, we started seeing things in Joan we didn’t like. Her being opinionated for one thing. Let me rephrase that – her being DISRESPECTFUL is what I mean. She would give her opinion of a situation – and nobody was allowed to have an opposing viewpoint! If you disagreed with Joan, she would argue with you, and you ended up feeling belittled, like your opinion or viewpoint had no value. And that is wrong, wrong, wrong, because every human being on this planet has worth. Just because they disagree with you, does not give you the right to devalue them their basic human right to a free opinion!”

And it was at that same time that Joan turned on me! I was to obey her views on adoption, when I told her to get lost and mind her own business, when I was adopting my own child, she TURNED on me.
She alienated my children from me, she interfered with my and my husband’s parental authority, she called me an unfit mother, called child abuse on me, took my daughter from me…and to this day…has the gall to think she was right and I was wrong, regardless to the fact that I own the paperwork that states my innocence!

Joan is very self-centered and thinks that she can write a untruthful account of everyone’s life and get away with it…NO…doesn’t work that way.

Joan gave us sisters the opportunity to tell the entire world what Joan has done, thank you Joan!
And we shall do just that…tell the world every thing that Joan has done…

2. chayelet – December 21, 2010
As for me, my way of dealing with those early traumas -mother’s death, placements and serious personality clashes with my father, was to move to the UK.I had made my decision as early as 1965, aged 17. I moved here in 1973 and have been too involved with building and sustaining my life here to be anything but a bystander in this whole reunion thing, and I made that quite clear to JW from the very start. Gert and Ruth speak about a time when JW TURNED against them.Both times it was when Ruth and/or Gert said NO to JW. Same with me. I saw from our very first days together that JW was a user but it was 1988 when her demands for a free ride on a 3rd visit were just a bit too intrusive. I did not ring her to tell her to stay home- she stayed home because her kids were sick (quite rightly) and common sense prevailed. But because I would not offer her free food and lodgings, her attitude toward me changed dramatically.

Certain ‘acquaintances’ in the UK had to terminate budding friendships with her because of her incessant phoning up at 3 am local time, asking for favours, etc. None of that had anything to do with me ‘bad-mouthing’ JW. She did it all by herself.

And now, with these few lines, I believe I have covered everything about me that JW has issues with, except for the Rene Hoksbergen incident circa 1992 to which Ruth and Gert have alluded in previous posts, and so there really, truly, and officially is nothing left for me to say on this subject.

3. gert – December 22, 2010 
Well said Kathy!!!

It trully is amazing just how ‘far-fetched’ and ‘off base’ Joan’s understandings of any person/situation is! And the reasons for that is because it is always Joan’s inner mind that is always talking to her, that makes all her decisions for her about what any person was THINKING AND FEELING, instead of what ACTUALLY and TRULLY happened…and Joan wonders why people don’t understand her…no one is in Joan’s mind except Joan. Reality is NOT Joan’s mind!

And…we are NOT completely done with the subject of Hoksbergen, not by a long shot, we are not done…there is much much more coming out on that one…as there is so much more damage that Joan has to account for.

…all in good time, my pretty!! all in good time.

Steak or Hot Dogs? Joan Wheeler hasn’t a clue what the Sippel kids ate – and this has WHAT to do with her adoption? November 9, 2010

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

From Gert to Ruth:

I just had to address this issue, saw it late last night and stayed up late to do it….so unbelievable even though it is out of sequence I believe that it will serve a purpose… that she is no social worker…so Ruth if you can post this soon….

Joan Wheeler’s book is so full of nonsense it is an overwhelming bunch of garbage.

Taking a peek ahead into the depths of the craziness that Joan has written, I found something that just boggles my mind and felt the need to bring it up now. Chapter 38 is called ‘unequal treatment of 1 half-orphan out of 36 resulted in a traumatic  life outcome – a Social Work Assessment’

It begins with ‘April – July 2009’ meaning of course she wrote it or massively rewrote it just before publication. It continues ‘this assessment is complicated to read, but necessary to understand’. I ask you what has Joan written that has been easy to understand? This entire chapter was an ‘afterthought’ of Joan’s so she could continue with her rants under the guise of ‘social work’. What a joke Joan is! Anyone with or without a degree can tell that Joan is nuts. This is the chapter that she says our father couldn’t understand, which btw caused him to say to others that it belonged in the trash! I’m not ready to comment on this chapter in full…in time it will be addressed…but there is one short paragraph that caught my eye.

Under a title of ‘known and unknown rumors against my natural father’ it defies reason has to what that title or what she has in it has to do with her adoption and how it was an ‘unequal treatment’ and how it resulted in a traumatic life for her, for she wasn’t there. It is Joan’s attempt to prove that her traumatic life is because of all the things she has put into this afterthought chapter.

Steak or Hot Dogs?

I can’t imagine how she can believe or devise these tales but as always she has to put her own spin on it. There are many outlandish tales cooked up by the adoptive family because they had some kind of weird idea about my parents and our economic circumstances and Joan has taken them to be ‘true’ and the reason why she is so traumatized. Bull Shit. Here then is one small paragraph that Joan has written on pg. 542 which caused her trauma!  (Ruth’s note: how in God’s holy trouser’s could what we Sippel kids ate for supper when Joan wasn’t living with us caused her trauma is way beyond me!)

One story that has circulated for decades is that in the years before and after my birth and disappearance to adoption, my father fed my siblings hot dogs while he (and presumably my mother and then my siblings’ step-mother) ate steak. When I asked Dad about this, his explanation made sense to me since I, too, raised children. Parents do their best to provide quality food, but when children prefer to eat hot dogs because they taste better to kids, it is easier for parents to give in than to fight about dinner. There is also another explanation – that my father sent my brother to the Broadway Market to buy hot dogs for dinner. He took his time walking home, eating the uncooked hot dogs on the way. There was no dinner for the rest of the family.’ (Ruth’s note: this sentance makes no sense – it does not compute! – When she says that there was no dinner for the rest of the family – does she mean to imply that my father and mother (or stepmother) ate a steak dinner in front of us kids while we went hungry? HOW DARE YOU JOAN! We kids ate supper EVERY FUCKING EVENING! My father and mother/stepmother  was responsible enough to make sure there was adequate groceries in our house for EVERYONE to eat. Not like JOAN and her ex-husband – in another section of her book she says that money was short that often HER kids had one meal a day. That’s a reflection of JOAN’S poor parenting and financial irresponsiblity! She couldn’t feed her kids? Yet she had money to zip around the place attending adoption conferences! Or going to rock concerts! But when money was short, and HER kids ate only one meal a day – did she get off her lazy ass and get even a part time job in the evenings at the Tops Supermarket one mile from her house? Before Joan starts painting the Sippel kids as deprived, she needs to take a close look at how she treated her own kids – like crap!)

This is pure hogwash! I haven’t a clue how she could possible believe such a tale and then put it in a book about her adoption! The basic true story was related from birth relative to adoptive relative and then turned into totally false-hood by the adoptive relatives for reasons of their own. But Joan NEVER researched the truth of the story and instead adds things on, that are of course not true and embellishes it with her own ‘time period’ thought patterns. 

One can tell that it is another ‘Joan centric’ tale because she starts it out with her birth and ‘disappearance to adoption’ as if B.J. (before Joan) had some kind of great turning point in the way our family lived.

Here is the truth and beginning of the tale: My father was raised an only child after an elder brother died. His mother was very protective of him and of his health in particular. She always maintained that her son should have the iron in steak so that his blood was strong and he would not become weak like the son that she had lost. When my father and mother married, his mother would bring a steak to my mother, every week, telling her it was for her son. My mother, being a good daughter-in-law, thanked her mother-in-law and put the steak in the freezer till she had enough to feed the entire family. There is nothing more or less to the story, simply that my mother was no fool. She knew enough to keep her family fed with or without the additional weekly steak that her mother-in-law, my grandmother gave her.

Most of the time during and after my mother’s illness and death we children lived with or were taken care of by our grandparents. Then Dad remarried and his mother came again to her new daughter-in-law, my stepmother with the ‘steak’ for her son. This did not go over well with my stepmother and it was probably she who fed us other meat, again, because she was the wife and in charge of the household and kitchen, not my father.

What Joan tells in this tale is not true and it suffers greatly from total fabrications. She says that she asked Dad about this, well I have no way of knowing if that is true or not but it seems that even if he attempted to give an explanation of it that explanation was embellished by Joan. Dad is a guy and some guys just don’t think about how and what kind of food got on the table. Joan doesn’t think! In the 1950s the world was different, the husband gave the wife the ‘grocery money’ and that was that. So Dad did not feed his kids anything, his wife did! And he ate what was put in front of him!

Joan states, ‘Parents do their best to provide quality food, but when children prefer to eat hot dogs because they taste better to kids, it is easier for parents to give in than to fight about dinner.’ This is Joan’s inner mind working again, subjectively and certainly putting words into someone else’s mouth. This might have happened in Joan’s home with her adoptive parents and then with her children but it certainly didn’t happen in my father’s home. This statement is an editorial comment, has nothing to do with the story at all. Joan was NOT THERE, she would not KNOW that as a child, in my father’s household, if you didn’t eat what was put in front of you, you stayed there all night till you ate it and if you didn’t you had it for breakfast, or, you went without and went to bed hungry!  (Ruth’s note: This is correct, not only in our house, but our grandmother’s house, and in the foster home that we were in for a few years. This is why I will not eat, to this day: oatmeal, lima beans or brussel sprouts. The women in our lives, our father’s mother, our step-mother, our step-grandmother and our foster mother, were strict. They did not cook a meal only to have a child waste it).

Here are some other very important facts that Joan does not know about. While there was the Broadway Market it was not in the neighbor and my father would never have sent my brother or any of us there to purchase anything. There was a local butcher within 4 blocks from home where we went for meat. Joan doesn’t know that because she wasn’t there and the adoptive relatives were not there! All she and they know is the Broadway Market!

Joan then continues saying about my brother that, ‘He took his time walking home, eating the uncooked hot dogs on the way.  There was no dinner for the rest of the family.’ Again, made-up, sounds more like something The Beaver would have done, but not a real kid who was sent to the store to get something. If anyone of us did such a thing forget about dinner, which was called supper at our house, you would have been sent to bed with a ‘licking’.  (Ruth’s note: again, the women in our lives were strict – we got a good smack on our backside when we misbehaved. Something more kids need in this world of kids AND adults not having any self-control or sense of self-responsibility).

Joan knows nothing about what happened in our family because she either wasn’t born yet or she was adopted out as an infant. (Ruth’s note: this sentence makes perfect sense to me – how the hell does Joan know what we Sippel kids ate for supper? SHE WASN’T THERE! I WAS! I KNOW WHAT WE ATE, WHAT WE DIDN’T EAT – AND HOW OUR FAMILY EXISTED! AND SO DOES GERT AND SO DOES KATHY – NOT JOAN. Joan keeps saying that her adoptive family, both her parents and the extended Wheeler family LIED to her about her adoption, and the existence of her siblings. How does she know that they weren’t also LYING to her about our family life? And how the hell do THEY know about it? THEY were NOT part of our family growing up! The only contact between the two families was my mother’s sister Catherine – and she raised her kids the same dam way – her husband always had liverwurst sausage in the fridge and limburger cheese – and NOBODY touched them! – and by god NOBODY touched Uncle Ray’s stuff! BUT, I ate dam well at Aunt Catherine’s house and I ate the same food that my cousins Norman, Ida and Gail had! – so this bullshit about what we Sippel kids ate came from the LYING WHEELERS! – And they sure taught Joan how to lie).

These tales are fabrications told to her by her adoptive parents and Joan hasn’t got the good sense to keep them out of print. She really ought to be ashamed of herself. She really ought to go after her adoptive relatives and leave the birth sisters alone.

(Ruth’s note: a competent social worker would know not to publish “urban legends” such as the steak/hotdogs or Butch eating hotdogs walking down the street. Better still, a COMPETENT social worker would get to the root of the “urban legend.” But since Joan DIDN’T bother to consider a family anecdote that sprang from either a faulty memory, or out-and-out LIES from her adoptive family, this clearly shows us that Joan is no dam social worker).

Addendum from Ruth:

I have already addressed this family anecdote about us Sippel kids eating hotdogs in my post Photos from the Past  March 15, 2010. You have to scroll down to see what I wrote. But to save you the trouble here is what I wrote:

Joan also says on page 542 that our father fed kids hotdogs while he (and presumably my mother and then my siblings’ step-mother) ate steak. This is a family anecdote that Joan in her “brain fog” has gotten wrong.

What happened was this: my father’s mother was from the old-school, she would send over a steak every Friday for my dad. My mother, and then later my stepmother would say “thank you,” and put it in the freezer and the next week, another steak would come, and then we all would eat steak. and yes there were times that we kids would eat hotdogs.

As to the next “story” that my father sent my brother to the Broadway Market for hotdogs, and he ate them on the way home, leaving no dinner for the rest of the family, this makes no sense. Broadway Market was 2 and a half long blocks up Smith St. and then 5 short blocks over. There was Matty’s Deli right around the corner if we needed something in a hurry. Besides, there was Loblaw’s at the corner of William and Emslie only 5 blocks away and Joan was not there, I was. I went shopping every week with my stepmother. We had money for dinner people. come on. What Joan is doing is having “brain fog” in hearing another family anecdote that my brother was sent to the store and probably did eat the hotdogs. I WAS THERE, I HAD DINNER EVERY NIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH! (Ruth’s note, November 8, 2010 – Gert is right – we did call it supper in our house. My husband John and I call it dinner in these present days of 2010).

And if we were so “poor” how come we had one cat, 2 parakeets, turtles, fish, Visible V8 Engine set, chemistry sets, build your own radio kits, a backyard gym/swing set, electric football game, kitchen sets with hoses to a bottle to supply running water, the first Easy Bake oven, Chatty Cathy dolls, Nancy dolls, Janet Lennon dolls, Elsie the Cow doll, some doll, if memory serves, The Breck Doll, sponsored by Breck shampoo, where you learned to style hair, and these weren’t Barbie doll sized, but big – their heads were at least 3 or 4 inches across! I had a Drink and Wet doll who was at least 15 inches long! The first Lite Brite sets. Sno-Cone set. I had a chair and desk set with reversible top – chalkboard on one side, artist easle on the other, paint by number sets, the original Cootie and Mr. Potato-Head.

AND we had our living room set from Ethan Allen furniture (NOT cheap) – colonial style! with a couch that opened to a bed. Colonial style rocking chair, coffee table (of which I had until the early 80’s), colonial style dining room furniture, of which I have TO THIS DAY, one of the chairs – it’s sitting four feet away from me right now! I vividly remember being with my step-mother and step-brother bringing home the living room lamps from downtown Buffalo, Hens and Kelley. AND if we were soooo poor, how come every week, my step-mother took me, my brother and stepbrother downtown to the movies, usually to see the new sci-fi, stuff like “The Cosmic Man” “Hypnotic Eye” “Attack of the 50 Foot Woman”  “Invaders from Mars” “Darby O’Gill + the Little People.”  We saw Fantasia, went to the circus, I vividly remember not liking the clowns and my stepmother holding me. And all the junk we brought home. I also vividly remember my stepmother taking ME alone to see the brand new Hayley Mills film, The Parent Trap. My brothers and I had Roy Rogers capgun sets, complete with belts, which my grandmother didn’t like. Rubber Jim Bowie knives, Davy Crockett hats. I had a Howdy Doody doll who came to the hospital with me when I had my tonsils taken out at 7 years old, where I threw a temper tantrum because they shut my tv off just as Chuck Connors The Rifleman came on! (I had to leave my rifle home, dad wouldn’t let me take it).  All these brand new toys, and pets, but we were poor? I DON’T THINK SO!

(Ruth’s note, November 8, 2010: The Wheelers [but I suspect it all came from Mama Wheeler] thinks we Sippel kids were soooo poor. We came from the “inner city?” Oh yeah? Well, so did THEY! We lived on Smith St. They lived on Coit St. – ONE BLOCK OVER, TWO BLOCKS UP! So Dorothy/Doloris (yes, she goes by two names), take your suburbian snootiness and shove it – ‘cos you came from 3 blocks where we lived – THE INNER CITY!)

And pray tell: what does all this have to do with the supposed purpose of the book Forbidden Family – Joan’s adoption, Joan’s reunion with us and adoption reform? – ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

Gert – November 9, 2010

Ruth states:
‘And pray tell: what does all this have to do with the supposed purpose of the book Forbidden Family – Joan’s adoption, Joan’s reunion with us and adoption reform? – ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!’

True, absolutely nothing! Joan is totally against any form of adoption, because, she was adopted and her adoptive parents, lied to her, kept secrets from her, betrayed her and when she was ‘found’ by birth relatives, her adoptive family further betrayed, lied and harassed Joan for having a birth family. Nasty business for sure from the adoptive family, but hey, that is not the birth family’s blame.

Joan repeats, at nauseum, her tramatic life as a basis for adoption reform. NO! Joan’s life is what it is because of Joan, NOT adoption. It’s about time that Joan got out of the fog and get the hell over it! She was dealt a raw deal, well she isn’t the only one. She is suffering now because she CAN’T stand the fact that three birth sisters are finally able to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Joan get a life before you find your self on your death bed all alone and wondering how you got there with no one!

This blog will continue to truth tell and refute everything in that book of garbage!


Posted by chayelet in Our Family History, Private, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Statements from The Three Sippel Sisters.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

It has come to my attention that Joan Wheeler has published a family photograph which includes my image to publicise her Book of Lies about myself and my family.


1. RuthJune 22, 2010 [Edit]

I hereby give notice that legal action will be taken against Joan Wheeler IMMEDIATELY. I will contacting my lawyer in the morning.

We Remember Our Baby Sister Doris January 18, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Our Family History.
Tags: , , ,
comments closed

On my page “Our Family History of Adoption,” I tell the story of my mother’s death, my baby sister Doris’ relinquishment to adoption, my father’s remarriage, and our hard growing up. While we growing up, because of my oldest sister’s G.’s remembering of our baby sister, the rest of us kids always knew that we had a baby sister somewhere “out there.” Every January, G. would buy a doll and give it to my father, so he could give it to Doris for her birthday. She doesn’t remember exactly how many years she did this, but by the time she was 16, she had stopped.

When I was around 11 years old in the foster home, I received a new prayer book. This prayer book had printed on it’s inside back cover, a special page. There was a small prayer on top and a blank lines going down the page in a list form. This was where you wrote the name of a person that you wanted to say special prayers for. I had written on my list, assassinated American President John F. Kennedy, the first (and so far, only), Roman Catholic US President. President Kennedy was a big hero for American Catholics. My grandmother had a picture of him hanging up in her kitchen. Black folks have a picture of Martin Luther King on their walls, for Catholics, their hero was Kennedy. He was bigger than John Wayne “The Duke.” When Kennedy was killed, the nuns in my school were all crying. School was let out early. We were sent home. Some smart aleck kid asked Sister what homework should we do. She tearfully said, “Say a rosary for President Kennedy and a rosary for the First Lady.” I also had on my prayer list, Pope John the 23rd, who had died in June 1963, a few months before President Kennedy. I can’t remember all the names on my list, I probably had my father there. But I do know, that on the top of my list, I had written “Doris.” Then I drew a line from the end of her name, leading down to a space at the bottom of the page. I ended that line with an arrowhead, pointing to a phrase I had written. “So Daddy can adopt her back.”

Now if you read my post “Our Family History,” you have read how it was my mother’s sister Catherine and her childhood friend Helen (sister of Doris/Joan’s adoptive father), brought about the idea of Doris/Joan getting adopted. Because of the friendship between these two women, a picture of Joan, when she made her First Holy Communion was given to my Aunt Catherine. Joan says there was a conspiracy of lies and spying on her between the Wheelers and her birth family, and pictures of her were exchanged. There was one picture and ONLY one picture given to her birth family. But here is another example of Joan’s exaggerations and twisting of the truth. Anyway, growing up, my sisters and I would go over to Aunt Catherine’s house and in going thru her boxes of family photos, we saw this picture. In the picture, Joan looks remarkably like my oldest sister G. G. said she knew it wasn’t her, her hair was darker than Joan’s. She says she always suspected it was our lost little sister Doris. For myself, I was so dumb, that I would think it was G.

Now as I said, we never forgot our little sister. Particularly G. She kept questioning Aunt Catherine and finally got some information out of her. Sometime in the summer of 1972, I got a phone call from G. She was at her job at a downtown Buffalo dentist’s office. (Brisbane Building). It was a Tuesday, the dentist did not have patients in on Tuesdays, (and he himself wasn’t there), but the workers had to come in and do paperwork. I went downtown and to the office. Gert told me that the evening before, she had finally gotten out of Aunt Catherine, our little sister Doris’ adopted name. It was Joan Wheeler. But Aunt Catherine refused to give G. an address or any other information. G. asked me “how are we going to find her without her parents name?” I thought about it, and asked if there was a phone book around. I opened it up and went to the Wheeler listings. There were a lot of Wheelers. I asked G. if I could use the phone to make some phone calls. As the other woman working in the office was on her lunch break, and we were alone, G. told me to go ahead. I planned to make as many calls as I could while in the office, calling all the Wheelers listed in the phone book until I got to one that had a Joan living there. I hadn’t watched mystery movies without learning something.

 I started making my calls. Those that had someone home told me I had the wrong number when I asked for Joan. When I got to the first names starting with E, I hit the jackpot. A girl answered the phone. I froze. I knew immediately I hit the motherlode. She sounded exactly like my second oldest sister K. But I had to be sure. I asked for Joan. She said “speaking.” “Joan, this is (I gave a fake name). Where were you at bowling last night? We figured you couldn’t get a babysitter so we just started without you.” The girl said, “what number did you want?” I repeated her number, but changed one of the digits. She said, “oh. No, you got the wrong number.” I apologized and hung up. G. who had heard all this was looking at me. I told her, “That’s her. She sounds exactly like K.” We wrote down the name and address listed in the phone call. Now we knew where our little sister was, and what her new name was. We knew we couldn’t do anything as she was under the age of 18. So we waited.

In early 1974, I was living back at my dad’s house, after 3 years of having my own apartment. In 1970, my father had met a nice woman and they got married in October 1970. She had two girls, aged 10 and 4, and the following year, they had a baby boy. In 1973, my stepmother wanted to go back to work. So I moved back home. I was working the night shift at my job (where I still am). My stepmother worked 3pm – 11pm. And my Dad still had his job at City Hall, but he was no longer working at Sears. With me moving back home, there was an adult present at all times to watch the girls and our baby brother. One day, G. and my older brother Butch came into my bedroom and woke me up. They told me that Doris/Joan’s 18th birthday had just passed. Should we contact her? It was unananimous. We would. We knew we couldn’t tell Dad. We didn’t know much about legal matters in adoption. But we knew enough to know that Dad couldn’t contact her. Now we just had to decide which one of us should contact Joan. I told G. and Butch that it should be G., because she was the oldest. And so she did.

 Now I need to make some refutations about a couple of Joan Wheeler’s statements. After all, that is the purpose of this blog. In several of Joan’s writings, she says she was given up for adoption because she was “unwanted.” This is a lie. My father always wanted her. Her siblings, ME AND MY SISTERS AND BROTHER WANTED HER. Several other times Joan Wheeler has said that we, her sisters blame her for our mother’s death. HOW COULD WE BLAME HER FOR OUR MOTHER’S DEATH WHEN WE KNEW IT WAS CANCER THAT KILLED OUR MOTHER? And if we blamed her for our mother’s death, WHY DID WE ALWAYS REMEMBER HER? WHY WOULD G. TRY TO SEND HER DOLLS FOR HER BIRTHDAY IF WE BLAMED HER FOR OUR MOTHER’S DEATH? WHY WOULD I HAVE WRITTEN HER NAME IN MY PRAYER BOOK FOR PRAYERS AND WRITE “SO DADDY COULD ADOPT HER BACK?” WHY WOULD G. QUESTION OUR AUNT FOR INFORMATION LEADING US TO HER IF WE BLAMED HER FOR OUR MOTHER’S DEATH? WHY WOULD I GO THRU THE PHONE BOOK TO TRACK HER DOWN IF I BLAMED HER FOR MY MOTHER’S DEATH? WHY WOULD WE MAKE PLANS TO CALL HER AND GET HER BACK INTO OUR LIVES IF WE BLAMED HER FOR OUR MOTHER’S DEATH? But this is what Joan does. She lies. She has gotten herself in trouble with each and everyone of us. And instead of owning up to her contributions to our estrangement with her, she makes up stories to cover her own ass. And then she tells everyone what dysfunctional people her birth siblings are. On page 8 of her book Forbidden Family, she relates HER version of the phone call I made to her. She changes the facts. She says she got the call in the evening. WRONG! IT WAS AROUND ONE O’CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON. She says the caller was obviously drunk. WRONG! I WAS NOT DRINKING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE AFTERNOON. She says the call ended with stupid laughter. WRONG! WHEN I CHANGED THE DIGITS OF HER PHONE NUMBER, AND SHE TOLD ME I HAD THE WRONG PHONE NUMBER, I APOLOGIZED AND HUNG UP. This was a serious attempt to find my lost baby sister. I was calling all the Wheelers in the phone book to find my lost baby sister. I would not be doing this thing while drunk and ending such a serious call with stupid laughter. This labeling of me as “drunk” is another of Joan’s attempts to smear my character. I first read this lie in a 1997 manuscript of her book.  And it was at  the height of her troublemaking against me. And as I said before, she will not own up to HER contributions to her birth siblings not wanting her in their lives. She will not accept responsiblity for her own actions, so to cover her own ass, she will tell people how important she is, how educated she is, how smart she is. And then spread lies about her birth siblings, like they are dysfunctional, they are drunks, they are jealous of her, they blame her for their mother’s death and blah blah blah.

 So I ask you blog readers, those who know Joan, those of you in the adoption reform community, what nice things has she said about her birth siblings? I bet she has filled all your heads with horror stories of how evil and jealous we are. How empty our lives are. And that we hate her and hate her children. ALL LIES AND MISCONCEPTIONS FROM JOAN WHEELER, WHO CONSTANTLY GIVES OUT HER TWISTED VERSION OF THINGS. But didn’t she herself just leave comments on that recent story (November 2009) on ABC News.com about adoption that the reporter twisted her words, and she always had problems with reporters giving their twisted version of what she had said. But this is exactly what Joan does. I have told you about the phone call I made to find her. IT WAS IN THE AFTERNOON, AND I WAS NOT DRUNK, I DID NOT END THE CALL WITH STUPID LAUGHING. I swear to you blog readers on the soul of my son, who I miscarried in June 1985, that I have told you the truth about that phone call. But Joan wants you to read a twisted version of what happened: HER TWISTED VERSION. HER LIE OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. In fact, a couple of years ago, someone close to Joan told me that she (Joan) “…is crafty at twisting words.”

%d bloggers like this: