Gosh Joan really doesn’t want the birth sibling to speak their truth!
The only way that the automated functions of Amazon, would ‘know’ whether something is ‘a miss’, is if someone, namely Joan M Wheeler, contacted Amazon.
On February 18, 2016, I noticed that Ruth’s review (#11) was ‘removed’ from the Amazon page of Joan’ latest revision of lies! Just like myself, Ruth’s review is a ‘no-no’ because, according to Amazon, we ‘know the author’. Dahh!! That’s the automated system’s way of saying that THE AUTHOR doesn’t want a particular person writing a review!
But…we are able to comment, on other reviews and have discussion topics and comment on them!
Ruth’s ‘review’ was published on January 4, 2016; here is the link and the content of that review.
And for the record here is Ruth’s review and comments…
By Ruth Pace on January 4, 2016
Format: Kindle Edition Verified Purchase
this book was previously removed from print by Trafford Publications because I sent them actual police and court documents that proved that 1. she libeled me in the book. 2. she did not protect my identity – in a footnote she told her readers (all 10 of them) where to find an article she wrote in 1990 that contained my full and true name. 3. She had on the back cover a family photo that was taken a year before she was born. — She signed a contract with Trafford stating that her non-fiction book was the truth, but my documents proved she lied, and the contract also stated that the author holds the sole copyright to the work and all it’s content – how does she hold the sole copyright to a photo that was taken before she was born? Because she violated the contract she signed with them, the publisher pulled it from print.
She also claimed that a lawyer “vetted” the book. No, because she says in the book that my father was a poor uneducated man, however in 1955, he took a job as a civil engineer in the streets paving department of the City of Buffalo, working in City Hall, and had many political persons as personal friends. Joan’s “lawyer” was either a piss-poor vetter, or a figment of Joan’s imagination. Why do I call this lawyer a piss-poor vetter? Because in the downtown public library of Buffalo NY are back issues of Polk’s City Directories – that list my father’s name, address, employer and his job title in the directories from oh, the late 40’s all onto the 2000’s.
Jan 4, 2016 12:31:12 PM PST gert mcqueen says:
Yes, Ruth, this revised and reworked piece of work contains many false-hoods, fabrications and misrepresentations, as well as libel. This time around she has real names of many members of the families, including pictures. Why? Because she says, dead people can’t sue and neither can their heirs. She has spent a few MORE years, of her horrible life as a duped adoptee, rewriting her memoir in order to change MANY things. Why? Because she has read our complaints about her selective memories, and since key people like the adoptive mother and OUR father are now dead, she feels FREE to expound with more creative FICTION upon REAL PEOPLE, all the while never mentioning her own actions within any particular circumstance or situation; it’s always about the other guy, never her.
As we have stated over many years, since the appearance of her first piece of exploitation, the reasons that she falsely accuses family members is because she hates being adopted, her belief that everyone in two families where all out to get her and her belief that the world will learn something from her life. What will they learn, you ask? That the author needs serious help.
on Jan 4, 2016 12:50:47 PM PST Ruth Pace says:
Gert McQueen says “the reasons that she (the author) falsely accuses family members is because she hates being adopted.” I concur, but also add, the reason she goes after her birth sisters is because she was adopted out and we were not. Also – she singles me out in particular to be her main target. Why? Because when our mother died, I was placed in the care of my mother’s brother M. and his wife, who actually wanted to adopt me and raise me in the Protestant religion. But my father refused, because he wanted me raised as a Catholic. — The author simply can’t stand the fact that my father gave HER up for adoption, but not ME. She has been trying to punish me for that since the early 1980’s. The various versions of her book contains many many lies about me. The majority of the book is involved in detailing MY life story, about my dancing, my marriage, my miscarriage. Every other page is Brenda this, Brenda that – (she calls me Brenda, but leaves many clues to my real name). Brenda, Brenda, Brenda. Is this a book about adoption or adoption reform? Or is it a book about the life of Brenda?
Here are a couple of other related links, to Ruth’s review, followed by permalinks to Ruth’s discussion on Joan’s Amazon page.
permalink to Ruth’s discussion topics