very nasty behavioral patterns…some exhibited by ‘duped by adoption’

here’s a great article on learning and understanding behavioral patterns…

 

How do we save humanity? By believing in socialized psychopaths!

Advertisements

Is it another power play by Joan M Wheeler, this time to take Mirah’s place, and/or is there REALLY trauma in being adopted?

NEW POST always good info

Reclaiming the Sippel-Herr Family Honor

First, it needs to be noted that Joan M Wheeler has changed her name to Doris Michol Sippel, her birth name. She shall NEVER be that birth named person to anyone in the birth family for she DIED the same day as our mother died. So regardless of what Joan calls herself, for she has multiple screen names, I shall never recognize any but Joan M Wheeler.

Second, it appears as if Mirah is bowing out of the mainstream spotlight of adoption reform activism; that’s a topic for another post. As usual Joan is attempting to make yet another power play to get herself onto the top of the heap; Joan loves to state HOW many years she’s been fighting etc etc etc. Joan attempted a power play in 2015 with Joyce B from UI Adoptee Rights NY. See this link for fuller details…

https://gertmcqueen.wordpress.com/2015/07/18/how-the-sneaky-dangerous-adoptee-joan-m-wheeler-duped-by-adoption-operates-be-it-on-public-platforms-behind-the-scenes-or-in-libelous-and-slanderous-ways/?iframe=true&theme_preview=true

Third, there…

View original post 3,698 more words

How many versions and revisions are there to the truth behind the Forbidden Family? #4 discussion topic

A new discussion topic, #4, by Ruth Pace. Getting right to it, for it speaks for itself!

Here is the permalink;

http://www.amazon.com/gp/forum/cd/discussion.html/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?ie=UTF8&cdForum=Fx3T0YAD0KXNPP5&cdMsgID=Mx3EG5MNPEG5WOD&cdMsgNo=1&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx3K5W903CKIRXV#Mx3EG5MNPEG5WOD

revision and revisions of the ‘truth’ – how many versions and revisions are there to the truth behind the forbidden family?

May 8, 2016 3:00:51 PM PDT

Ruth Pace says:

The reason this is a “revised” book and self-published on amazon, is because when the first edition of Forbidden Family came out, there were blatant lies in it. The author signed a contract with Trafford Publications stating that her “non-fiction” book was truthful and she held the copyright to the work and all its contents. On the back cover was a family photograph taken at least a year before the author was born. actual date is not known, the author’s mother did appear to have a “full-size” belly, but the size of the child held in the author’s father’s arms appears to only have been 2 years of age. That child had turned 3 the summer of 1955, the year the author surmises the picture had been taken. There is no way the author has copyrights off a picture that was taken before she was born (and she admits it inside the book).
The other thing the author violated in the contract? – That her ‘non-fiction” book is truthful! I found many lies in it – particulary in regards to ME and MY LIFE. I still had actual police and court documents regarding 3 separate court cases of harassments that the author had performed against me – which proved the LIES contained in Forbidden Family. These documents were sent to Trafford Publications and their legal department determined that the author had indeed violated the contract that she signed. In May 2011, Trafford pulled the book from publication.
The author then proceeded to to “revise” a book that she herself had touted on the internet as the TRUTH. I have asked time and again, how can the TRUTH BE REVISED? It cannot. This new “revision” is not revised at all, except to change the wordings of certain things, adding new lies, and taking out 4 chapters – chapters that deal with adoption reform!
I realize that this reviewer does not have the 2009 edition of this ‘book’ to compare. But my blog contains many passages of the 2009 edition along with scanned copies of my documents. My blog Refuting a Book of Lies, Forbidden Family is the real ‘go-to’ source of finding the out how and what the author was duped about.

 

And the Permalink to Gert’s comment

https://www.amazon.com/gp/forum/cd/discussion.html/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?ie=UTF8&cdForum=Fx3T0YAD0KXNPP5&cdMsgID=Mx3ROXCT27Q2F8H&cdMsgNo=2&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx3K5W903CKIRXV#Mx3ROXCT27Q2F8H

May 10, 2016 7:37:20 PM PDT

gert mcqueen says:

The family picture was taken in summer of 1954. The birth of the fourth child of the mother was in August 1952; that child is being held by the father at age 2 years! The mother then had a miscarriage in 1954; after the picture was taken (hence the full belly). The mother did NOT conceive the author until summer of 1955; therefore, in that family photo, the author was NOT YET CONCEIVED and has no rights to claim that family picture as hers.

When the mother became pregnant in 1955 she developed complications, by December was sent to the hospital for complete bed rest and was placed on the drug DES, which was at that time used to hold and keep pregnancies. It is no longer used for that purpose. The mother delivered her 5th child, the author, in the hospital bed herself, January 1956. After the birth, cancer was found, after ONE exploratory surgery, it was determined by mother and father (husband and wife) that there was NO NEED for further treatments and the mother agreed to have the father FIND another wife to care for her children.

Unfortunately, the woman that the father had proposed to marry REFUSED the infant and therefore the ONLY option available to the father was to place that infant into ADOPTION. It should be kept in mind that the husband KNEW from January 1956 that his wife was DYING. There were no options with the extended family; the father was firm, if he could NOT raise the child NO ONE in the family would! He had more than enough time to know and make his decisions, without pressure from church. When he chose adoption, in his mind, he closed his mind to the existence of that 5th child and she DIED on the same day the wife/mother died. This is RECORDED in the family bible found upon the death of the father in 2011.

The author is an adoptee, that adoptee! She wants adoption abolished! She feels that she has been duped by the institution of adoption! Be that as it may…fabricating and outright lying about members of TWO families, birth and adoptive, and exposing those families, by using real names and other references, exploiting them, for the sake of fame and fortune is beyond comprehension. Regardless of what one’s position is on the issues of adoption this book will never help anyone or change any laws regarding adoption. This book is just one woman’s failed attempt to come to terms with and living a life that was given to her…by the same entity that gave life to every human being! Its way pass the time that this author gets on with HER LIFE and stop lying!

end

 

the difference between bothering a person and writing about a sales product; #3 a discussion topic about Forbidden Family; adoptee duped by adoption

Found on Amazon’s Customer Discussions

Joan Mary Wheeler forum

http://www.amazon.com/Joan-Mary-Wheeler/e/B00XX0BFC6/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0

the difference between bothering a person and writing about a sales product

Initial post: Apr 10, 2016 7:25:19 AM PDT
Ruth Pace says:

in a facebook discussion the author says this about her ‘older sisters’:

“You can see my older sisters’ harassment and slander and libel on my Amazon page. They found me in 1974, and I soon found out that they are crazy, very dysfunctional, and will not leave me alone. All 4 of my parents are now deceased. You can read the whole story in my memoir: Forbidden Family: My Life as an Adoptee Duped by Adoption.”

The discussion here is about THE BOOK – not a person. I have said that due to my sending actual police and court documents about certain passages in the first edition of THIS BOOK, that proved that the author LIBELED me in THE BOOK, that BOOK was pulled from publication. It had NOTHING to do with the PERSON of the author, rather THE BOOK that she wrote.

The author signed a contract with Trafford publications in 2009 stating that her non-fiction book “Forbidden Family” is factual and true. When I sent actual police and court documents to Trafford, their legal department determined that the author VIOLATED THE CONDITIONS OF WHAT SHE SIGNED. It was therefore, TRAFFORD’S decision to remove the book from publication.

Subsequent numerous editions of the book “Forbidden Family” do not impress me, nor does the ‘renaming’ of the book by adding a few words to the title. The content is still the same as the 2009 edition, plus more libel. Dried egg is very difficult to remove from dishes and faces.

Soon after I posted this discussion point, the author removed the name-calling from her fb page. Doesn’t matter. This discussion is about a SALES PRODUCT not a person. I reiterate: dried egg is difficult to remove from dishes and faces, and darned near impossible from a paperback book.

Your post, in reply to an earlier post on Apr 10, 2016 10:52:28 AM PDT

gert mcqueen says:

This book contains actual real family names and pictures of both the adopted and birth families, which makes identification very easy and WRONG. The book, the first and this current ‘revision’, does indeed have many falsehoods and fabrications (things that NEVER occurred) and is slanted to paint a false picture of every member of two families. The only reason this revision is available is because it is ‘self-published’ thereby by-passing the middle-man. A book can NOT be harassed. A book CAN be discussed and that is what is being done, here in the proper format. Knowing what is IN the book is helpful to customers…that is the purpose of discussion topics.

Posted on Apr 11, 2016 5:29:13 PM PDT
Ruth Pace says:

Gert McQueen says: “This book contains actual real family names and pictures of both the adopted and birth families, which makes identification very easy …”

This is one of the problems with this book (a sales PRODUCT, NOT A PERSON) – When the book has clues for the reader to find MY true name, it left the book with libelous accusations. For example, stating that I have a criminal record, when in fact, I do not. On my blog, I have left scans of the actual police and court documents when the author and I were involved in 3 court cases of harassment. Somehow, the 3 cases got merged into ONE court battle in the book, lasting “three months.” – There ‘were’ three court appearances in 1995, (for ONE case) each one for about 15 minutes in front of the judge. The BOOK leads the reader to believe it was a continuous “three month court battle.” (quote from the book).

The court documents I submitted to Trafford Publications shows that in March 1995, the author appeared for her arraignment. (which took approximately 10 minutes). The case was adjourned to April 1995, where the judge adjourned the case (again, that took about 10-15 minutes). The case reconvened in May 1995, again, taking only 15 minutes. — Another complaint I filed in 1999 against the author gave me another document – a computer readout from Erie County (New York) Unified Court Systems showing all cases involving me and criminal background – which showed NO CRIMINAL RECORD for one Ruth Sippel (my maiden name). This document was sent to Trafford Publications which proved that I was libeled in this book – where it says I have a criminal record. I do not have a criminal record. Therefore – the book contains a LIE about me.

Your post, in reply to an earlier post on Apr 17, 2016 4:36:55 AM PDT

gert mcqueen says:

name calling…

Interesting to note that the author has two sets of standards which she demonstrates, in the pages of this book and elsewhere when she is promoting the book, one for herself and one for everyone else.

The author’s portrayal of everyone in the book makes it look like the ENTIRE world has conspired against her because they are all so evil and cruel and crazy and dysfunctional. And those words are NAME CALLING. She engages in name calling all the time, but does not allow that practice by others. Case in point; here is what she said on March 14, 2016

“This is the first time I have ever seen you behave like this. Keep it up and I will block you as well. Not allowed on my posts.
I’d appreciate no name calling on my posts.

I have survived enough of that in my lifetime, a lifetime full of hate form so-called adoptive relatives and blood as well. there is absolutely no need for adoption at any time under any circumstances.
I know full well about the divide within adoption reformist groups as I’ve seen it for 40 years. I do think we can all learn from one another. But I don’t like calling names or putting down academic writings. I’ve learned from writings by adopted people who wrote memoirs and I’ve learned from professionals with PhDs. That is why I am 100% anti-adoption.”

This author speaks with forked tongue! If the author can portray others, according to her whim, just how truthful a depiction is it in this book? And if she will NOT allow others to ‘name call’ then WHY does she engage in the practice when discussing BIRTH family inside this BOOK and elsewhere?

End