abuser, adoption reform, adoption reunions, birth/adoptive families, blaming people for your own mess, child abuse, co-dependency, confrontations with Joan Wheeler, embellishing the truth, family honor, Forbidden Family a book of lies, lying, sins of omission and suppress of one's own misdeeds
What Joan Wheeler screams for (family preservation) is the very thing she DESTROYED when she was found by her birth family!
We birth siblings made contact with Joan when she became of age at 18. Joan decries that she was ‘not mature’ to handle that. Whose fault is that? Certainly not ours! We waited till we could contact her and bring her back into our family. Eighteen years old is the recognized legal age for a female in this country. Of course not everyone is mature at that age, but, that lack must fall upon the shoulders of the parents who raised any individual eighteen year old and not the birth siblings because we contacted the poor immature activist. I was married with a child at age 18. Victoria became Queen, of England, at age 18! Joan’s insistence that she was immature at 18 and unable to come to terms with having ‘family’ in her life is just another cop-out on her part.
Joan is so secure and proud of her abilities of being an activist since 1974, at the age of 18, she constantly tells everyone that, but she cannot take responsibility for MATURITY at that age! Seems to be a contradiction here! And yet, only 5 years later, at the age of 23, in 1979, Joan was so secure and mature in her abilities as an adoption activist (and without the social worker’s degree that she never had a job with) that she knew just what was WRONG with my adult/parental rights and decisions, with my minor children and ADOPTION my own son!
Why doesn’t Joan Wheeler tell the world about that? Why does she not tell everyone how she went and DESTROYED my family unit, because of her dam activism? Because she is a coward and a liar and a manipulator! Why is Joan NOT INSULTED by her own behavior? Because she believes she is above the rules!
She also screams for reform of the laws that govern birth certificates. Problem is…she is NOT talking to the right people…the law makers! All she can do is go out on the web and scream and scream. This does not make any changes. No one is listening to her.
She always is personally insulted and has to make sure everyone knows it. She never sees the joy in a story, only an opportunity to beat her drum. She has no shame. She can browbeat people with her ‘proper and improper’ names but the reality is; she hasn’t a clue! She hates adoption because she was adopted and she must have been abused by that family for her to hate so much. And she hates the birth family because she was NOT in our family. Her hate is all she knows and until she stops her hate campaigns against the birth siblings, we will continue to speak out against her lies and hate.
Here’s another example of Joan’s drum beating…
Here is my comment to this news story, posted Oct 24, 2012…
regarding Joan Wheeler’s comment on Jan 3, 2012
Joan Wheeler knows nothing about family preservation. In 1979/80 she interfered with my parental authorities and rights with my minor children. She told me, in front of my children that I was unfit because I was ADOPTING, my own son with my second husband. She had gone behind my back telling my children they should not listen to me because I was not in touch with reality of ‘today’s world’. When I told her to butt out of my family’s business, forbidding her contact with my children, she placed two false child abuse reports against me. I divorced her in 1980/81. In 2009 Joan wrote a libelous book, called Forbidden Family, which is no longer being published because myself and other sisters, provided evidence to the publisher. She and her boyfriend have a total of 3 hate blogs against the family that she SAYS ought to be ‘preserved’. Believe Joan Wheeler at your own risk. See blogs for fuller details… https://gertmcqueen.wordpress.com and http://ruthsippelpace.wordpress.com
Here is Joan’s comment…
Joan M Wheeler
This reunion story is unique, given the age of the natural mother and her adopted-out daughter. While this story has a happy ending, it must be noted that this mother and daughter should not have been permanently separated by society and laws. What is not told here is the heartache felt by those who endured such separation. We need to strive for a society that protects the bond between mother and infant by supporting a young mother to keep her child. Family preservation should be the goal. I realize this separation happened 77 years ago. We should, today, not be still promoting adoption as the only solution.
What also is not addressed is that all adoptees suffer at the hands of state governments that automatically seal their birth certificates upon adoption. An amended – falsified – birth certificate is then issued for the adoptee claiming that the adoptee was born to parents who are actually adoptive parents. Every adoptee is thus required by law to possess a legally inaccurate birth certificate while the true document is sealed away forever. What is needed now are two solutions: unseal original birth certificates of all adoptees, without conditions, and, the abolishment of the amended birth certificates for adoptees, replacing the false birth certificate with a truthful adoption certificate.
I would also like to point out that, for decades, the news media and general public have been using the wrong terminology to describe these situations. “Biological parents” is an incorrect term for parents who relinquished an infant or older child to adoption. Some parents of adoption loss prefer to be called “first parents” while others prefer “natural parents”. The term “birth parents” is still used, but can be insulting, especially when used by pre-adopting people who refer to a pregnant young woman as “our birth mother” — assuming that this pregnant woman is carrying the baby that they will adopt from her. Wrong: every pregnant woman is a mother; she does not become anything else until after relinquishment. “Biological child” is not only insulting, but it is also a term used in the 1970s (and before) when society fumbled around to describe people who are now referred to as “adoptees”. No need to call us “adult adoptees” as that term is redundant and insulting. The parents who adopt an infant or child are “adoptive parents”. The argument that using the term “natural parents” demeans adoptive parents by inferring that they are “unnatural” is plan nonsense because “natural parent” is a legal term found on many adoption papers. Actually, my Final Order of Adoption states my relinquishing parent as “father” because he was my father ( my mother died). The parents who petitioned the court to adopt me were referred to as “husband and wife” on all legal paperwork, not “parents” or even “adoptive parents”. January 3 at 3:07pm