jump to navigation

Joan Wheeler LIES again – about her “employment” credentials! August 12, 2014

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

Joan Wheeler LIES again – about her “employment” credentials!

 Today, August 12, 2014, Joan writes this about the suicide of Robin Williams:

 “As a former suicide prevention and survivor counselor, this is hitting me pretty hard. “

 What a lying bitch! She NEVER worked as a suicide prevention and survivor counselor, she has gone on record on the internet to say that she worked as a VOLUNTEER answering telephones at the Crisis Services Center –

She has also said in her book and on the internet that she herself has considered suicide. She had expressed suicidal thoughts to me in person in 1986. How the hell can she talk someone out of killing themselves when she herself is so fucked up.

 Joan routinely engages in “resume padding” all over the place. She has not had gainful employment since the mid 90’s when she worked for a short time as a skip tracer for a private investigator. Her ex-husband has said that one of the reasons they got a divorce was because she refused to “get off her lazy ass and get a job.”

She did go to college to get a social work degree, but HAS NEVER WORKED A DAY IN HER LIFE AS A SOCIAL WORKER, despite her saying all over the internet that she has, and is. At the same time that she claims to BE a social worker, she admits to be receiving Social Security Disability because she CANNOT WORK DUE TO HER MULTIPLE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS!

 Joan Wheeler is nothing but a lying sack of shit.

 

1. gertmcqueenAugust 12, 2014 [Edit]

Gert here…
Joan is currently resume padding and using the death of Robin Williams for SHOW. She has a NEW love, so she HAS to present to this sucker that she has the knowledge and know-how, that she FEELS. What a bunch of BS!

Joan has been on the look out for a NEW LOVE ever since that last NEW LOVE turned out to be a drunk and abusive…gosh only last year! And so, she is enthralled with a NEW NEW LOVE and is all gushy with her vast experiences…NOT.

Joan NEEDS someone to fix her house, help pay her bills, cause she doesn’t have any $$ and she needs to be fucked every so often and so since that last one ‘bit the dust’ she’s been FIRST in isolation, licking her self-inflicted wounds, and SECOND getting out there, leaving her REAL love of adoption reform, on the door step UNTIL she found a new SUCKER.

Oh I forgot…she NEEDS someone to cover the cost of the publishing of her NEW AND IMPROVED MEMOIR. Can we say SUCKER?

 

What’s the REAL reason Joan Wheeler is going back to the boyfriend from New Mexico? January 4, 2014

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

What’s the REAL reason Joan Wheeler is going back to the boyfriend from New Mexico?

She says on twitter it’s because he needs her. And she wants to “save” him by getting him to the proper therapy. Oh yeah, right. Like she knows what the proper therapy is. She’s been in therapy for more than 30 years and it hasn’t worked on her.

She also devoted a whole chapter in her stupid book on another abusive boyfriend – she was terrorized to be with him because he was violent – yet she stayed with him because she was trying to “save him from his drinking problems and get him into the proper therapy.” Sound familiar? That was back in 2007 and she failed with him. AND despite him saying specifically to her that he did not want to be in her book, she put him in it as a revenge. AFTER her attempts to save him failed.

So she’s got another guy to save? BULLSHIT. She’s the one who NEEDS him!

In the early fall of 2012, she was on the internet whining that she needed to find a boarder to “save her house from foreclosure.” She found one. He lasted two weeks. The guy actually contacted me via facebook private message to tell me that she is nuts. (thanks, man, I know that already).

So fast forward to the other day, she tweets that a “friend” of hers, “C.” is facing homelessness, and she took her downtown to apply for HEAP. um, BULLSHIT! If you’re facing homelessness, you don’t need HEAP – HEAP helps pay your HOME’S heating bill. If you’re not going to have a HOME, you ain’t gonna need it.

Last night, while she’s tweeting about the latest chapter in The Joni Soap Opera, she’s asking people to keep “C.” in their prayers.

UM, JOAN – YOU GOT THAT BIG HOUSE TO YOURSELF – WHY DON’T YOU PROVIDE “C.” WITH A HOME???? You’re so smart as to how the system works – big ass social worker that you are – you know what programs she can apply for. And YOU can get help for your mortgage and save your house from being foreclosed.

Listen, people, there is no “C.” – it is Joan herself who is facing homelessness. That’s why she NEEDS the boyfriend. So that his SS check can help pay her mortgage. Just last week, she’s bitching about him being a creep, a drunk, a convicted drunk driver, she spent 5 days in a homeless shelter in Taos, New Mexico while he was in jail over the summer, he’s a stalker, a cyberstalker and cyberbully – he showed violent tendencies while she was with him – and now all of a sudden, she’s wanting to resume their relationship so she can find the proper therapy for him. What she’s trying to do is convince him to come back to Buffalo, move in with her, and use his check to pay her mortgage.

How do I know this? Because she stole hundreds of dollars from me in 1989, and tried to extort $$$ from another sister in 1992. She’s a user and an abuser. This guy would do well to stay the hell away from her. She can’t help him – she’s so messed up in her own head she can’t help even help herself! She’s a manic depressive! She’s never held a job for even ONE DAY as a social worker. She’s a sociopath and a psychopath. She needs to be committed.

*if anyone reading this is wondering how do I dare write about Joan’s personal life – Joan wrote a filthy slanderous book with things in it about MY personal life – and lied about it. As to why I’m writing about this boyfriend, if anyone is thinking how is this my business? – Joan MADE it my business when she brought him to Family Court in July 2013 when I had her in court for harassment charges. She MADE him my business when she brought him to my godmother’s wake and funeral and she MADE him my business when she was tweeting about he isn’t on twitter but I am and I am “cyberstalking” her like he is.

1. gertmcqueen

Gert here! right on Ruth…what this guy NEEDS to do is READ a copy of Joan’s book, I’m sure she’s got a copy there! He needs to read what Joan has said and done to other boyfriends she’s tried to save! Or better yet, this guy ought to read our blogs, for we not only tell the truth we QUOTE Joan’s words. Joan also tried in 2009 to get our father to; paid for her car repairs and publish the book! I just placed a blog post about this stuff YESTERDAY! Our father’s widow told me that when Joan was ‘taking’ her grocery shopping, Joan would put items in the cart that SHE WANTED and NEVER offered to pay for them. She told step-mother, she didn’t have money. Finally, they refused to allow Joan to take them shopping, Ruth is also correct about HEAP, no address, no money! And at this time of the year, unless there is an emergency HEAP’s money is GONE. And who is the male friend of Joan’s that had to fly in cold weather? Is it the same friend who spend weekend ‘relaxing’ with Joan, as she told on twitter? doesn’t she KNOW that you don’t put your private shit on the internet? what if the guy in NM finds out? Oh I forgot, she doesn’t want me near her! sure, right! mark my words… he’ll get in a program and swear that he’ll behave himself and she’ll allow him to visit and help around the house and then before you know it…HE is paying for her and her house…fools!!

Joan Wheeler lies about her siblings again, does not want us to speak up for our reputations. October 31, 2011

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

so the other day, Joan leaves another distorted “truth” about MY family on a New York Times online article. Gert corrected her distortion. JOAN- WOULD YOU PLEASE STOP PUTTING FORTH THAT TWISTED LYING RENDITION OF HOW YOU GOT TO BE ADOPTED? -enough already!

So Gert left a comment, CORRECTING Joan. Gert spoke the TRUTH about how our father came to the decision to relinquish Joan for adoption. But the TRUTHFUL way he came about his decision does not jive with Joan’s version. So Joan wrote another comment and trashed us again and lied about us again. Gert and I both left comments. I think mine got cut off – I think it was too long. But anyway – here is the link to the comments: http://community.nytimes.com/comments/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/the-dilemmas-of-international-adoption/?sort=newest

So here is Joan’s newest comment:

Contacting and reuniting with natural family should be done with proper thought, careful planning, and consideration for the person and family being found. If my natural father had been given opportunity to be the one to make first contact, he would have handled it differently by contacting my adoptive parents first. Since I was still in high school at the time, I was unprepared for how the reunion unfolded. When my two fathers were together face to face, there were handshakes and tears. My natural father extended his hand to my adoptive mother as well. As the reunion went on, my two sets of parents met often with me and developed positive relationships, eventually welcoming grandchildren, having parties, and visiting each other even into old age. I was in the middle and tried the best I could to make sure both sets of parents knew I cared about them by acknowledging that I had “Two sets of real parents”. I wanted peace between the two families and they agreed. It was the fighting that my three older sisters created that caused the breakdown of our reunion. Keep in mind: I had relationships with other relatives besides them, and still do.

I am not exploiting anyone by telling my story. My older siblings never wanted me to speak out and write about my adoption. They complained all these years (since 1976) whenever I wrote articles in the paper about adoptees’ rights. I am an adoption reformer, whether it be domestic or intercountry adoptions.

I firmly believe that adoptees have the right to know their natural parents and other blood kin, despite the negativity of my sisters. They do not know that “no” means “no”. I want nothing to do with these people, yet they continue to interfere with my life. Not all reunions end up this way, but this negativity points to the evidence that adoption destroys families forever.

and here is my comment in it’s entirety:

HalfOrphan 56, aka Joan Wheeler is definetly a poster child for the delusions of anti-adoption.
Ms. Wheeler says, (about her birth siblings): “(they) never wanted me to speak out and write about my adoption.”
This is a complete fabrication. In 1980, I accompanied Ms. Wheeler to WGRZ-TV studios in Buffalo NY for an interview on adoption reunion and supported Joan in her desire to write a book on her adoption, her reunion, and her viewpoints.
Ms. Wheeler spent the next 30 years, writing a book that contained complete falsehoods in it.
We were reunited with her in 1974, by 1981, Ms. Wheeler became an interference in our lives. She disrupted many lives with her harassments.
Yet, until the year 1990, I continued to try to reach out to her, to be a sister to her, until she stole several hundreds of dollars from me. After I broke off ties to her, she began a campaign of hate and harassments against me, including calling my place of employment almost daily for 6 months, trying to get me fired.
When her book was published in November 2009, I was appalled at the lies in it. One, that I have a criminal record and arrest record, both are falsehoods. In December of 2010, my sister Gert McQueen and I, submitted complaints to the publisher of Ms. Wheeler’s book, Trafford Publications, After several months of investigation, on May 6, 2011, Trafford pulled the book from publication on the grounds that Ms. Wheeler violated her contract with Trafford that her book contained no slander, libel, or that she owned sole copyrights to all content of the book. She had submitted a photograph, published on the back cover of the book,of my family, taken in 1955. Ms. Wheeler was not born until 1956, and, being adopted out in 1957, no longer a legal member of my family. How does this person own a copyright to a photograph of me, taken when I was 3 years old? – And Trafford Publications agreed.

I am not going to get into any discussion of the morality/immorality of adoption. That is for people who have that passion to do. I merely want to set the record straight.

Joan Wheeler – Half Orphan – has been proven to be a liar, a trouble-maker, (one example is writing to me in 1999 that my infertile husband got the next-door neighbor pregnant), a person who misrepresents and lies about  her birth family, and herself. She claims to be a disabled social-worker, yet never worked a day as a social worker. She claims to have been a suicide prevention counselor, yet only worked as a volunteer manning telephones. She herself has threatened suicide as a ploy for attention for years, to my face at least twice, and once in 2010, on an onliine discussion forum.

 Ms. Wheeler says “Not all reunions end up this way, but this negativity points to the evidence that adoption destroys families forever.” – NO, it was not her adoption that destroyed our family – it was her own behavior that destroyed our reunion.
Would you keep a person around you that steals from you, lies about you, tries to get you fired from your job, writes letters to you that your husband got another woman pregnant? NO?, Well, neither do I. 

And here  is Gert’s comment:

When she was 18, her four siblings wanted to make contact. I spoke with a lawyer and an adoption agency and was told that yes indeed siblings COULD legally make contact with an adoptee once they were 18. She was ‘looking’ for her birth family, but she has choosen to focus only on the fact that it was her siblings, namely me because I was the eldest, who made the initial contact.
 
I do not for a second buy this adoptee’s reasonings, about anything, for I have known how she thinks or doesn’t think at and about any given circumstance. This person continues to place blame for her inabilities of everything onto everyone else. I shall not take the blame for her, at age 18, for NOT being prepared for LIFE, that was the adopted parents responsiblity, not mine. I will take responsibility NOW for the fact that it was the WORST MISTAKE of my life for ever wanting to know this sibling that was placed out of our family. Blood doesn’t make a sibling, this sibling was not raised like we were and therefore she can not comprehend HOW we think, and that is why she exploits us, to make us into what she thinks we are or should have been. Read all about just how this adoptee was the victim by her siblings, please do come and take a look.
ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com   gertmcqueen.wordpress.com
 
When you lie about things, to promote a cause, that is called exploitation! I did not give you permission to speak or write about my life. If ‘NO’ means no then why has this person, not only continued to interfer with our lives, for years, but then wrote a libelous book about us and everyone else’s lives? We have NOT been in her life. Today we are only refuting and setting the record straight from all the lies this person has told and continues to tell about us and family. She can write all she wants for adoptee rights, I never said she couldn’t! She can write about HER adoption. She CAN NOT write about MY LIFE. What I object to is her lying about my life and my family’s lives.

comments to this blog post:

1. Ruth – October 31, 20

oh by the way – Joan says she was still in high school when we contacted her – so? She was 18. legal age.
and she had made the conscious decision at the age 16 – two years prior – to search for her birth family – so this nonsense that she was not prepared is pure bullshit!

2. RuthOctober 31, 2011

and then I left this other comment on the site:
No one is interfering with Half-Orphan’s life as she claims in her latest comment (#163) –
fact – at the age of 16, she made the conscious decision to search for her birth family.
fact – she was aged 18 – legal age, when she was found by her birth family. she may have been in high school, but she was prepared for the reunion – she wanted it since she was 16.
fact – in 1974 we reunited with her, but by 1981, she began exhibitng harassing behavior towards us, her birth sisters.
fact – her book WAS an exploitation of US – by telling private details of our lives, which had nothing to do with her adoption, or reunion, or activism.
fact – her book was pulled from publication due to slander and libel
fact – it is half-orphan who is the one who continuously misrepresents and lies about us, her birth family.
fact – we do not care about her views on adoption – we only speak up when she lies about us and our family. she can say anything she wants about adoption – but not about us or our family.
fact – it was not her adoption or a failed reunion that destroyed our family – our family was never destroyed – and yes, our reunion failed, becasue of half-orphan’s own harassing and hate-filled behavior.
Whether adopted or not, reunited or not,, birth sister or not, I will not have a person who has done many detrimental things to me around me.

3. RuthOctober 31, 2011

in the meantime, I see on my stats pages, that the moderators of the comments to this article came to view this blog and Gert’s blog.
As of yet, they have not approved our answers to Joan.

If they do not approve our comments, I will demand that both of Joan’s comments be removed on the grounds that they are libelous to me and my family.

If the New York Times does not want to get involved in a family squabble, that’s fine by me – and if they want to censor me, they dam well better censor Joan!

4. RuthOctober 31, 2011

New York Times opinion moderator, despite having checked out our blogs several hours ago, has still not posted my comments. So I sent this message to him/her:
dear moderator,
if you are not going to post my comments, as is your right, then please remove Half-Orphan’s posts, as they are complete falsehoods.
No one is interfering with her life.
Half-Orphan is well known in the adoption reform community as Joan Wheeler – so her words are being read and her slanders about her birth family is being read and understood.
She has a two web sites where she slanders us.
I can understand you not wanting to get in a family squabble, fine, then be fair – don’t give credence to a bully, but not let the bully’s vicitm have their say.
I flagged Half-Orphan’s lastes post as inappropriate because it contains slander. Her book WAS pulled by Trafford Publicatiion due to its slanderous content. contact Eugene Hopkins at Author Solutiions if you do not believe me.
thank you for listening.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


———————————————–

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

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

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

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

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

by Gert McQueen and Ruth Pace

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Joan Wheeler’s book Forbidden Family deliberately falsifiies the facts July 11, 2010

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

by Gert McQueen June 22, 2010

Joan Wheeler’s book “Forbidden Family,” deliberately falsifiies the facts of her birth, life, adoption, reunion, problems within and without her adoption and reunion, her activities within the reform movement, her career or lack of in Social Work and her own mental instabilities.

Joan’s so called advocacy for adoption reform ought to be based on facts, if it is to be of benefit for true reform. As such her book and it’s contents falls under the scientific parameters of getting at the truth. Any one who is serious about adoption reform would want to have true facts at hand to accomplish that goal.

 Unfortunately Joan is in love with her own theories. She can not give them up even in the face of overwhelming evidence that her theories are wrong. This blog’s purpose is to prove that her theories are wrong by giving that overwhelming evidence.

The following may be a somewhat unorthodox reference, but it says it quite well, in my opinion. I was watching a DVD last night called Dorothy Sayrers Mysteries Gaudy Night 1987 BBC.

A crime detective in the story said:  ‘The only principal that has made science possible is the ethical one, that, the truth must be told at all times and if we do not penalize false statements made in error than we open up the way for false statements made by intent and the falsification of fact made by intent is the most serious crime a scientist may commit.’

This is what Joan has done, she has made … ‘false statements made by intent and the falsification of fact made by intent is the most serious crime a scientist may commit’ and it is our intent, on this blog site, to bring out her falsifications of the facts publicly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE ONLY ONE TORMENTING YOU IS ….. YOU!

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

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

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

1. chayeletMay 21, 2010 [Edit]

Hear,hear! ‘Bye JW.

Reply
2. Gert – May 22, 2010 [Edit]

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

Truth in Non-fiction Books – author: Gert McQueen, March 16, 2010 April 1, 2010

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

Truth in Non-fiction Books
author: Gert McQueen, March 16, 2010

I want to start this entry with a quote, from a newspaper article, about truth within nonfiction books. But first…

UPDATE, FEBRUARY 2016, as older posts are being seen I’m updating with links to my second blog and a Facebook page wherein I expose AGAIN the lies, fabrications and hate that Joan M Wheeler says about me and family. After the first book was pulled from publication by the publisher, May 2011, she has ‘self-published’ another ‘revised’ version. In this ‘version’ called ‘duped by adoption’ she has increased her exploitation by including PICTURES and REAL NAMES and much more personal information violating again the families. Joan has no decency NOR shame. There is NOTHING in this book for adoption reform. She is totally against adoption and her two families. To learn more see…

https://gertmcqueen2.wordpress.com/

https://www.facebook.com/dupedbyadoption1

continuing on with this post

From the Watertown Daily Times, March 14, 2010, Latest book fraud puts publishers on defensive   By Motoko Rich, New York Times

‘Book publishers have long seen themselves as the gatekeepers of literary culture. But when they’re not looking, the truth has a way of being left at the door. Henry Holt and Co stopped printing and selling….because its author had relied on a fraudulent source for a portion of the book and possibly fabricated others…in many recent cases publishers did not seem to ask basic questions of authors….there’s a hazy line between ‘truth’ and invention in creative nonfiction, but good writers don’t have to make things up…’

The key point here is that Joan’s book is nonfiction but relies quite heavily on her use of ‘creative fabrication’ of events, particularly when she had no way of being present in certain situations and her creative use of ‘hearsay’ from relatives looking at something from many years distance. Her book should be called fiction based on ‘some’ true facts, not the other way around. Adoption advocates really ought to be familiar with the authenticity of their source materials, if you really want to be taken seriously by those that make the laws that you want to change, if not, those law makers are only going to laugh in your face for using Joan’s book as any means to your ends. Do you really think people in Washington believe this book of fabrication?

Now, for some reason the ‘tone’ of Joan’s book tends to be very derogatory and downgrades and devaluates members of her birth family. We sisters do not appreciate that and want to get the facts out and set them right from what Joan has fabricated in this book. And using the cover of ‘protecting by changing names and other facts’ does not work because that argument is not carefully followed within the book itself.

Our father, Leonard, was not poor, not in any long-term sense. There certainly are times when anyone has had economically ‘poor’ times. I have and you have but that does not mean I, or you, are poor. Our father worked as a laborer during his early years of marriage. I don’t know exactly what or where except that he worked for years in a bike shop repairing bikes. In today’s world, as in the late 1940’s, many people used bikes instead of cars and being able to repair bikes is a skill that is well worth having and earning a living by.

He went to night school to learn drafting and other skills when his first children were little. He started working for the City of Buffalo in 1953, when I was 6 years old and he worked there till his retirement in 1988 with 35 years of service. He was a civil engineer. He also has a Social Security pension. When he purchased a home in 1965 he worked a second job, as many people do, at the mid-town Sears, as a sales clerk not a machinist as Joan maintains, and he held that job for several years. He was a homeowner for about 12 years when that neighborhood changed, as many do, and moved his family into a very respectable housing complex around a harbor on Lake Erie. He lived there many years till moving into a small apartment closer to two of his, and his wife’s, children who help them out. My father is in his late 80’s, my step-mom in her late 70’s and they have had a great and long retirement that they have earned. It is a disgrace that Joan continues to portray our father in less than he deserves. Everything our father has, he earned. He is not poor, but he is not rich either, in the monetary sense. He is a rich man because he lives within his means and has more than enough to enjoy his retirement which is his right after working for years.

So why does Joan think she should ask her natural father for money to fix her car? Why doesn’t Joan get a job like everyone else and take care of her own bills like everyone else? And isn’t it interesting to note that on one hand Joan maintains that he is ‘poor’ but on the other hand thinks he has to give her money. That is the reason why she has no contact with her natural father today in 2010, because she was rude to him, saying that he should pay her for gas in her car when she takes him to the doctors. Gee I thought she was helping her aged father? It’s not a good deed if there are strings attached. But even if she needed the money for gas she could have been polite about it and then to top it off she said that it was his responsibility to give her money to fix her car. Our father told her, no it was her car, her responsibility and that he will no longer need her services or help, that it is best that they don’t see each other. How do I know this? Because my father told me himself a few months ago.

About myself, I also am retired and like my father am neither poor nor rich in the monetary sense but have enough to live comfortably on because I live within my means and have worked for my pensions. When my children were preschoolers I was that ‘dreaded’ telephone solicitor, part-time. After my first divorce I went to school full time for one year earning a Certified Dental Assistant degree and worked that job for 37 years. I worked in several private dental offices as an assistant including 3 years as an office manager. I worked 5 years at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Buffalo and 17 years with the Department of Defense at an army installation at Fort Drum N.Y. I have a 22-year federal pension and Social Security pension.

There was one year when I was in a transition, due to moving and starting over, when I had to work 2 jobs. That second job, after working 8 hours at my dental job, consisted of another 3 hours a night flipping burgers, dipping ice cream and cleaning toilets. I was not a young person that year, I was 40! And my education is not lacking either. Besides the one year of technical school I also went to college, part time at night, over the course of 6 years while raising two children. I was a single mom for over 10 years. I do not have a degree but I have everything needed for the two-year Liberal Arts Degree except the higher math and science courses, which I did not want to take. Since leaving college in the middles 80’s I have taught myself many things and have studied under and have been mentored by three PhDs in Germanic studies and other selective historical topics of interests. I am a published author.

My sister Kathy, living in England, has worked in child-care and in music being employed in the school system and other venues. She has proper college training and qualifications in and for music and teaching. She holds a statutory UK Government Clearance for working with children. She is a member of the UK Musicians Union. She speaks 5 languages as well as English. Before moving to England, she worked 5 years in the insurance business in the USA. She is currently retired.

My deceased brother Leonard Jr. was in the Marines during Vietnam. In civilian life he was a nurse’s aid and a mental health worker. With the GI bill he became a guidance counselor for the under privileged South-Western American Indians. His wife/widow was a nurse and is currently back in college. Their son is the founder of a couple of charter schools in Az.

My sister Ruth has been a nurse’s aid for over 37 years and is still working. She can add more here herself if she chooses.
(Ruth’s note: see my auto-biography listed as “Who is Ruth Sippel” at the top of this blog. My current activities are remodeling my house, getting my property landscaped, so that when I retire, my house will be done, and all I have to is enjoy my garden. My plans for retirement include, learning languages, Tolkien-Elvish, ancient Egyptian, modern Arabic and Japanese. I already speak some Arabic and some Spanish. My husband also wants learn languages. I may also become a Middle East dance teacher, as I have been approached several times to do so).
When I was 18, I was accepted into Bell and Howell Tech University to study rocket scientry. Yes, I wanted to work in NASA. Plans fell through for that. Yes, I suppose I could have gone to college through my adult life, but I never went. So what? In her book, Joan belittles me for this decision. Why? This is MY life. Whether I choose to go to college or become a welfare moocher is MY business. Do MY choices for MY life have any bearing on Joan’s adoption, reunion, or her social activism to reform adoption laws? Is the book Forbidden Family about Ruth’s life and decisions about her life, or about Joan’s adoption, reunion and social activism?
FYI: In the fall of 1971, I attended night school to learn shorthand (I already knew typing), and other office skills. In the summer of 1972, I attended Erie Community College, City Campus part time for college alegbra and chemistry, as a pre-requisite for bio-chemistry and anatomy for my health care profession. I attended those classes in 1973. In 1995, I served on a committee at Buffalo General Hospital, representing nurse’s aides, on studying new ways to deliver quality care to patients. In 1999, I took classes through my labor union to become a union steward. Also in 1999, I took a class to obtain my New York State Certification for Nurse’s Aides and in 2007, another class to become a Patient Care Associate, which entitles me to do EKG tests on patients and phlebotomy (drawing bloods). Throughout my adult life, I have attended continuing adult education classes at various colleges and musuems in fields     as varied as the arts, history, theatre, dance, metaphysics, computer skills.

    In 1982 and 1983, I attend classes through BOCES on Basic Electricity and Residential Wiring, being the only female in the class, and actually scoring higher on the finals then some of the men in that traditionally “male” skill.  Since becoming a home-owner, I have attended workshops at Home Depot to learn basic home repair, basic plumbing repair and creative painting techniques (stenciling, marbling, etc). I also enjoy doing crafts of all kinds, sewing, ceramics, folk design painting, beading, jewelry making. I also head up a local Star Trek fan group, the USS Ari, and publish a bi-monthly newsletter for that club.  I also learned belly dancing through attending many classes and workshops. 

     All of this, while WORKING AT MY JOBS EITHER AT TWIN FAIR, INC. (1971-1972) OR BUFFALO GENERAL HOSPITAL (1972 – present). And all the time I suffered through allergies, congenital scoliosis, irritable bowel syndrome, recurrent bladder infections 1982-83, 1985-1987, and 2008. Maybe Joan doesn’t know about my health issues because I don’t talk about my bowels to complete strangers on airplanes like Joan does and use her allergies, her IBS and kidney and bladder problems as an excuse for not gaining employment. One of the reasons her husband left her was because she refused to get off her ass and get a job. He told me this himself. — ok, let me turn the focus back onto Gert’s post:

Every one of us has gone to school and have worked for many years. Why is it that Joan has not? Why is it that Joan does not give her work history? All she says is that she is disabled.
Ruth’s note: Joan’s Resume: In 1978 or 79, she worked for a month at the place that manufactures Keri Lotion. Then she got a job as a transporter (driver) for the New York State Department of Youth, driving kids to doctor’s appointments, etc. In 1982 she got a job as a general office manager, for an Canadian man who kept an office in the states. She took in orders, packaged them and sent the packages off.  She was the only person in the office, had lots of downtime, use of a typewriter, and when she first got pregnant, there was even a cot for her to lie down if she got “tired.”  Just before her son was born, she quit that job. She worked again, around 1992, sewing canvas sails for sailboats. This lasted only a short time. Then around 1995, she worked as a skip-tracer for a bill collector. Again, for only a short time. She claims she has worked as a social worker, but refuses to say where. I don’t think she ever worked as a social worker. And god help her clients, she’d screw them up more than they already are. If she belittles her own family for not having a college degree, how is she going to view her clients who probably don’t even have a high-school diploma? — back to Gert’s post:

Why is it that Joan has no money? Why does she not have a job? Why does she think she is going to make millions of $$$$ out of this book of pure nonsense? Because her adoptive family (Ruth’s note, it was always her adoptive mother, not the adoptive family) has always bailed her out, taken care of her and given her stuff. She has chosen husbands that couldn’t or wouldn’t support her and her family and she tries to convince people that she is needy and she works the sympathy angle.
She is a con artist and a fabricator of untruths. She is a burden on society. She is supported by tax-dollars from working people and others that pay taxes. Yes, I still pay taxes that go to support people like Joan who do not work. What kind of disability does she have that prevents her from working? If she had a real job she wouldn’t have to exploit her families, the birth and adoptive families and con her friends into thinking she wrote a true story.

Ruth’s note: she says she has recurrent kidney and bladder infections, irritable bowel syndrome and allergies. She currently claims she is on SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and is receiving just under $700.00 a month. This makes no sense, just before he died in 2003, my ex-husband, was receiving over $800.00 a month on SSI. But then again, from 1973-1982, he was working at the steel plants, and paying into the system. – You don’t pay into the system, you get nothing out of the system! – all you get is the basic poverty stipend. That’s Joan’s own fault – she should have worked 30 years ago when she was young. I tried to get her job as a nurse’s aide back in 1990. She wasn’t interested. Hey, do you think I enjoy emptying bedpans? Wiping up a stranger’s butt after they just had diarhhea in their bed? I do it because it is a good-paying job, with good benefits, and I will get a good pension when I retire, both from my employer and the government. I don’t feel sorry for anyone who turns 50, and finally sees the writing on the wall and starts to panic because now they understand what people around them have been saying for years. Only now it’s too late for Joan. Her old-age is going to be what she put into it: NOTHING!. That’s the way the system works. Joan played while she was younger, and now must pay the cost. I have paid the cost all my working life, and when I retire, it will be my turn to play. I also take care of my body, to ensure that I will live a long life. I plan on living until I’m 150 years old!

Guest Post From Gert McQueen, birth sister of Joan Wheeler March 4, 2010 March 27, 2010

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

My oldest sister Gert, who has no computer,  (got that?) recently went to a public library and emailed this statement and asked me to post it here. — Ruth

From the eldest Sippel sister Gert, in respond to Joan’s book of fiction.

Having finally gotten my hands on this book of revelations! Do not relatives of Joan have the right to have their own emotions related to what she writes about them or their life or are we suppose to just allow someone to continue to lie and misrepresent us. If people have individual web sites, where they speak their own minds, like Joan, why is it that Joan’s family members are not allowed to have the same rights as she does and speak their mind. I am speaking my own mind, I have that right just as she does. No one can silent another, that went out with the Inquistion. I use techniques of Constructive Criticism and Higher Criticism when I read and comment on any book. I learned that from my years of research and writing and it is used routinely in the scholarly world.

On page 645 of Joan’s book she says she has worked in the field of social work. Would she please let her readers know when and where she worked? I’m really curious where she worked and gained her experience and you should too if the work she presents is to be believed. I took training at a Domestic HotLine center for a month and attended a couple of group sessions where my stories helped other people, does that give me creditials to say that I worked in those fields, even though I don’t hold any degrees. I also held a job for three months helping abused children, does that give me creditials to say I’m a social worker and have great experience working with abused children.

On the title pages of the book, she writes ‘some very traumatic events have been omitted’ as if to say hey there is much more that I can and will write about. Really folks all that statement says is there’s a ‘hint’ that the content of her book is going to be so sensational you must read it. It’s a come-on statement aimed at getting attention.

She says what she writes is from memory ‘without embellishment’. Really now! Who doesn’t tell a fish story when retelling from memory! If it isn’t embellished it certainly is highly subjective in nature and anyone who knows anything about ‘non-fiction’ knows that it better be object in nature if it is to be believed to be a true representation of the topic. This book should be listed as fiction.

In her acknowledgements she sure likes to drop a lot of names, as if that makes her important. It’s another publishing gimmick people, just like the foreward by a named Doctor. He calls the book a ‘reunion in progress’, but from whose point of view, totally from the adoptee, not the families! That’s biased people! You can’t have a work of non-fiction without being objective and unbiased.

She says in ‘why she wrote the book’, it was ‘to tell the truth from my point of view’ again that is totally subjective in nature and can not be considered non-fiction. Anyone’s point of view by nature is subjective and therefore does not meet the standard of truth. She ‘invites’ others, namely her family members to do ‘the hard work’ of telling their truth by writing a book. Wrong thinking. Writing a book is not the only way to tell the truth. Speaking for myself, I am doing the hard work by living my life and I don’t have any inner need to exploit the rest of my family by writing a book of fiction to play with myself.

Even on her facts she doesn’t get it right. My father went to night school to get a degree in engineering. He was a city engineer for about 30 years. He was not poor, he probably was part of that class called the ‘working poor’ like many people, including myself, have been in at one time or another. He was never out of work, like Joan is. He never cried poverty like Joan portrays him as.

There will be more from me as my life allows me the time to look at this book of subjectively fiction

%d bloggers like this: