Burning Bridges Can Be Beautiful

The version of me that tolerated bullshit just because she was my 'sister' or the other she - because she used to be my best friend.

My life is so calm since The Nameless One and the exBFF are out of my life.

 

Joan/Doris is old news, irrelevant, boring.

 a post I made on facebook earlier this evening.

 my facebook intro:

A few years ago, my sister Gert made a facebook page called "Duped by adoption & An Adopted Woman's Struggle For Identity; a book study" -- it was to replace our old Wordpress blogs. The other day, Gert made the decision to delete the page, as we no longer have a use for it. I wrote the following post a little while ago.

Despite my finding the other day that about 6 months ago Joan/Doris got called out on facebook for busting up a marriage, the time has come to put her where she belongs: away from us.

The Notice:

Notice from Ruth Sippel Pace

this page is in the process of being deleted.

Joan Mary Wheeler aka Doris Michol Sippel is irrelevant.

When her book was published in 2009, we had blogs to refute every damn lie that was in her wretched book. Those blogs were taken down by a series of trumped up complaints by Joan and one of her cronies. Doesn't matter - because we accomplished what we set out to do: get that book pulled from publication.

In the book, Joan/Doris twisted several stories regarding me and her - specifically in our court proceedings about harassment. In the book she says this and that -- I submitted the actual court documents to the publisher of her book. They reviewed everything and pulled the book from publication. 

When Joan/Doris signed a contract with them, she stated her book was non-fiction and everything in it was true and factual. When I presented the proof that she lied about me in the book - the publisher's legal team ruled that she violated her contract. 

Years ago, Joan/Doris had 3 fantasies. 

1. that her book would be a million dollar best-seller

2. her book would be made into a blockbuster Hollywood movie

3. because of those two 'successes', she would be in demand as a top speaker at adoption conferences all over the world.

When her book was pulled from publication, all three of her fantasies came crashing down on her. 

Joan/Doris and others like her describe themselves as 'angry adoptees' - those that are so pissed that they were adopted they can't see reason - in regards to anything. When I had my main blog up and running, and I would relate an action of harassment by Joan/Doris against me (like stealing money from me) - her 'angry adoptee' friends would come running and leave obscene comments on my page, and accuse me of not respecting Joan/Doris. 

I countered - if a person steals from me, and I outed them, you would say "You go girl. Don't let them walk all over you." But if that person happens to be an adoptee, you think I'm wrong for NOT letting them walk all over me. This is what I mean that these angry adoptees can not and will not see reason. They were adopted. They were wronged. Therefore the world owes them everything. The world should not be angry at them when they misbehave. They think that anyone who disagrees with them should be treated like dirt. BULLSHIT. 

So all this happened more than 10 years ago. What has changed? The adoptees that DO see reason, that DO object to people treating others like dirt, have distanced themselves from Joan/Doris. 

She struggles to get any books published. I don't know what else she does as I don't care about her. She has been neutralized. She has actually finally done what I started to accomplish back in October 2009, in answering a comment she put out on a national news website about adoption. --That she refrains from putting out information about us, her birth sisters. 

I had repeatedly said all over the internet - all Joan/Doris has to say is, "I was given up for adoption when my mother died and my father had child care issues. When I turned 18, I was found by my older siblings. We had a nice reunion, but then things turned sour. I do not associate with my birth sisters. " And for the past few years, that is essentially what she has been doing - maybe not in those same words. 

I myself do have a blog via Google's Blogger, that I had intended to replace my main blog from Wordpress. I was thinking about copying and pasting old blogposts here and there, but frankly, since I've retired, I got better things to do. And so does Gert, who had started this page also as a replacement for her old Wordpress blog. 

I will continue to keep my Google Blooger blog, in case Joan/Doris starts her shit again. But really, there's nothing she can do to me now. In the past, she liked to call my job with lies - trying to get me fired. Ha.! I'm retired now, I took away her favorite toy. 

Joan/Doris is old news, irrelevant, boring. And as I said above, we did what we set out to do: get that book that was full of lies about me pulled from publication. She did make two more editions of it, changing things around - making two more versions of 'the truth' - and how can there be more versions of a truth? I'm not talking about personal perceptions, but actual FACTS. She can't say she had an order of protection against me for the duration of one year, when the actual court document reads SIX MONTHS.

Facts are facts. Lies are Lies. She got caught in her lies, and the publisher saw the lies, and saw the factual court document and pulled the book. 

So, she self-published it and hawks it on amazon. She's not making any millions from it. Not many people are buying it. And those that do - if they can't see beyond the crap she wrote about me - her own admission to being a child abuser and an alcoholic, and a bar-hopping tramp - well if they like that kind of story-telling, they are as bad as she is. 

And with that, Gert and I bid you all a fond farewell.

We have peace and joy in our lives. I doubt that Joan/Doris does. We don't really care. And we hope anyone reading this has peace and joy in your lives as well.

Live Long and Prosper.

ps    oh, by the way, in deleting stuff from the facebook page, I came across this post that I made in 2015.

It is interesting that the other day, a troll came here and tried to shut us up. But on her own facebook page she put up a meme and left this comment: "Never let people bully you into not telling your story."
But that was exactly what that troll was trying to do to us - BULLY us into silence. And while the troll was busy admonishing us and telling us to behave, the troll stooped to calling us names. (how childish).

I did engage in a conversation with the troll - but will not do so in the future. All trolls will be dealt with swiftly. If you want to engage in an adult conversation, fine, but bullying and name-calling will not be tolerated.

Getting back to the present: in regards to bullying trolls -- this is exactly why comments have been turned off on this blog that you are reading now.

I don't have to take anyone's shit. 

brain dead anti-adopters who think Joan Wheeler, now known as Doris Sippel is squeeky clean are deluded idiots.

 

Recently Joan/Doris commented on an adoption group’s comment section. One anti-adoption person began singing Joan/Doris’ praises, to which I said to myself “oh brother!” and posted a comment that J/D is not such a squeeky clean person. I said that while I don’t care what she says about adoption, or what she does regarding her campaign in adoption and birth certificate reform,  I do take issue when she lies about my father, my family, and me.

My sister Gert was also commenting in the discussion, when all of a sudden, three anti-adoptees began arguing with us. In reviewing J/D’s comments on the thread and on her facebook page, it was clear she was telling them to go after Gert and me, egging them on, being their ‘puppet master.’ This is a tactic she has done before many times on the internet, when she can’t stand to see me and Gert speak our opinion. Then on a anti-adoption facebook page, one of those anti-adopters who was going after Gert and myself in the discussion, wrote about it, to which J/D commented, and a 4^th anti-adopter chimed in and claimed that Gert and I had been tormenting J/D ‘for years.’

To which I left a laughing fb emoticon. Right -- I’ve been ‘tormenting’ Joan? uh, no, it’s the other way around, J/D has been harassing me -- even to the point of calling my job with lies to get me fired (multiple times in 1994-95, and then starting up again in late 2012). I wrote about it in my former blog, to which J/D answered me via a comment on the internet site Huffington Post -- which I made a screenshot of, and is included in this blog post (see below).

In her comment, Joan/Doris publicly admitted to calling my employer and falsely accusing me (with absolutely no proof) of making phone calls and committing computer fraud.

 

 "you have used your employer's computers to read my blog and you have called from your employer for me to make appointments."

 

I will address the 2nd accusation first. When I took her to court for this harassment -- she testified on the stand that she received a phone call from my job's xray department around 10am -- and said that it was ME on the phone telling her to make an appointment.

WRONG - if the call was made at 10 am -- and from the xray department -- it COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ME. I worked 7pm to 7am -- and no, employees just don't waltz into a department, sit down at a desk and call someone. Hospital security cameras would have shown me doing this. There is no record of me doing this -- because I never did it.

Now for the first accusation -- K.H. has something called GUEST WIFI -- Visitors, patients, employees using their own cell phones and other devices and are legally sanctioned to use the guest WiFi. Patients bring in their laptops, and hook up to the guest WiFi.  I would always bring in my little Acer Netbook to work, to do writing and other things on my lunch break and use the guest WiFi. I didn't use my employee's computers. 

So if K.H.'s IP address showed up at Joan/Doris' blog -- THAT DOESN'T MEAN A DAMN THING. 

I have taken my netbook with me to various businesses, logged onto their guest WiFi and worked on my netbook, and surfed the net with it. I have done this as I waited while a new windshield was installed in my old van; when I was waiting while my van was inspected; while I was at the downtown public library; while I was waiting to have my van's oil changed; when I've stopped to have a cup of coffee; and while I was in the mall's food court waiting while John had his hair cut.

 Okay Joan/Doris -- here's a list of places that I've used guest Wifi at:

Barnes and Noble, Erie County Library (different branches), Delta Sonic, Transittown Dodge, Tim Horton's (different locations), Walden Galleria Mall, WalMart, Wegmans, Bj's, Home Depot, Excelsior Orthopedics, Buffalo Medical Group - and if those places showed up on your blog -- it doesn't mean I committed computer fraud --learn how the world of WiFi works.

Now go and call those businesses and tell them I went into their offices and used their computers to spy on you, and make a further asshole of yourself. Like you did with my former employer. (who did investigate me - because they had to - but found me innocent). You dumb paranoid braindead lying idiot. Grow some brains. And you dumb anti-adopters -- grow some brains, learn how to use 'critical thinking.'

Here is the screenshot of Joan/Doris’ comment on the Huffington Post from January 2013.

 

A Tale of Woe - of a horrible adoption - Joan Wheeler/Doris Sippel slams yet again, the woman and the priest who she thinks is responsible for that horrible adoption

In my last blog post, "Another nonsense statement (lie) from Joan Wheeler/Doris Sippel about my mother" - I wrote about Joan/Doris' response on facebook to the news of the Catholic Diocese of Buffalo naming 40 former Catholic priests who had been accused of child abuse. Joan/Doris told how she had known one of those priests when she was 12 years. And she then related that my father had shown her my mother's high school diploma and she recognized that same priest's name on the diploma. -- HA! In my blog post, I related that my mom had not even graduated from high school (confirmed by her brother, who is still living) and besides, she attended a public school, not a Catholic school, before dropping out of school. But see, Joan/Doris never bothers to do proper research and get the facts - but even when she does have the facts, she likes to twist the story around to suit her fantasies. In other words, she makes up things and LIES.

This blog post is about her second comment - made after a fb contact of hers, Mary P. asked if the priest (who supposedly signed my mom's non-existent diploma) "Was this the same priest who leaned on your birth father to relinquish you after your mother died?" (a fictitous story that Joan/Doris loves to tell about how her adoption was first thought of - that at my mom's wake, a woman and a priest both came up to my father and suggested that Doris be adopted). I have the screen shot of this and Joan/Doris' answer. It is included in this blog post below. I won't type the whole thing out, but want to address a couple of things.

But first, the whole purpose of Joan/Doris' of telling this oh-so-sad, and totally FICTITOUS story is to ellicit SYMPATHY for herself. Witness what Mary says to her: Mary: "I'm so sorry, Doris. How unfortunate that this woman took advantage of your natural father while he was grieving. At that moment, he must have been so vulnerable. There's just some people who want what they want when they want it--no matter other people's feelings. And then the priest didn't intervene. Hugs to you, Mary"

Now, lets straighten this mess out.

My mom was in the hospital since Christmastime 1955. Very sick, pregnant. On January 7, she went into premature labor and delivered the baby, who being 2 months premature, was placed into an incubator. An exploratory surgery on mom was scheduled a couple weeks later and as soon as they opened her up, they saw she was full of cancer. Nothing could be done.

When the baby, named Doris was old enough to be discharged, she went 'home' with my mother's brother Richard and his wife Ann. Ann herself just had a baby in January 1956 and had little ones at home.

My mom's sister Catherine, who just had a baby girl on March 2, 1956, had a childhood friend named Helen. Catherine and Helen were still very close. Helen knew of my mom's illness and imminent death and the new baby. Helen's brother Edward's wife Dorothy was infertile and they had tried to adopt once before. Helen asked Catherine if my father would consider giving the baby up for adoption. Catherine called my father and suggested it. My father talked to our parish priest for guidance. My father did make the decision to relinquish the baby for adoption.

Now Joan/Doris loves to tell the tale that a woman approached my father at my mom's wake in the funeral home and asked about the baby be adopted. "I know someone who will take your baby." She has told that tale all over the place. And usually that's all she says. But this time she goes on to continue: "She (the woman) procured the baby - me - for her older brother and his wife to adopt."

Joan/Doris has also always told the tale as that AFTER (remember that word - AFTER) - the woman puts the idea of adoption into my father's head, he goes to his parish priest for advice and Joan/Doris has the priest telling him "the baby needs two parents." But now, in this NEW re-telling of her tale, Joan/Doris has the priest AND the woman badgering my father at the wake. AND she has the priest talking to my father BEFORE the woman talks to my father.

This is how the new tale goes: She tells of the priest talking to my father (answering Mary if the priest who was accused of child abuse is the same priest who talked to my father at my mom's wake) Joan/Doris says "NO! Good question though. " She goes on to say how she believes the priest who talked to my father had 'good intentions' and she continues her tale thusly: "AND, a woman came up to my father at my mother's funeral minutes after the priest. She said "I know someone who will take your baby."

Okay - so who approached my father first - the woman or the priest? Depends on when Joan/Doris tells the tale. Apparently the sequence of events changes. Well, you know what that means? Yes, Joan/Doris is a LIAR.

Remember how I said Joan/Doris tells this tale of woe to garner sympathy? Well, let's go over the timeline of Joan/Doris' oh-so-pitiful first year of life.

She is prematurely born on January 7, 1956 to a terminally ill woman, who dies on March 28, 1956. When Doris is discharged from the hospital, (I'm not sure of the exact date) she is taken by my mom's brother and his wife Ann. On March 4, 1956, Doris is baptized in Sacred Heart Church. Her godparents are Richard and Ann. She returns home with them. My mom dies on March 28, 1956. When exactly my Aunt Catherine spoke to her friend Helen is unknown. When exactly Helen spoke to her brother Edward is unknown. When exactly my Aunt Catherine spoke to my father is unknown. What is known is that sometime AFTER my mom's funeral, (according to my uncle Richard, who had offered to adopt Doris) my father called him up and told him to get the baby ready in a nice dress, as he (my father) was coming to get her (presumbly he had a ride, as my dad never learned to drive - his choice). He told Richard that he was taking Doris to meet other members of the family. But - he apparently he actually took her to the Wheeler's (or Surrogate Court, or some other meeting place). Now, I remember Joan/Doris telling me that she lived with the Wheelers for six months on a "trial basis." According to the actual adoption papers, my father signed his consent to the adoption on October 24, 1956. The Wheeler's verified their decision by signature on December 5, 1956, and the adoption was finalized on January 15, 1957. So if my father signed his final consent in October, six months before October was April - which jives with my Uncle Richard’s account.

But all this BULLSHIT about the priest and the woman is MEANINGLESS anyway. The exact time my father made the decision to relinquish the baby to adoption is unknown. Does it matter if someone approached him at the funeral? Well, it does if only for respect - but for the final outcome? My father had from April 1956 to the time he made the final signature on papers on October 24, 1956 to re-consider his decision. He did not. The adoption was not finalized until January 15, 1957, giving my father an additional two and a half months to change his mind - he did not.

Joan/Doris simply can NOT get over the fact that she was adopted. Her whole time on this planet is fighting that. She HATES the fact she is adopted and will try out any excuse as to why she should not have been adopted, and will try out any ridiculous scenerio on how her adoption could have been avoided. What's the purpose? No matter how much time she spends on it, no matter how much she fights it - the simple thing of her life is - she was adopted. NOTHING she says or does will ever change that. She's been trying for more than 40 years - she has wasted her life on trying to change something that cannot be changed. No kind of idea she can put forth will change the past. For example, in her facebook answer to Mary about the family priest who counseled my father, she starts talking 'what ifs' and says she thinks the priest meant well, but offered no real tangible help, like child care while my father was at work. She says "I don't think there was any malice intended by the priest ... only misguided advice." She goes on to say that she gets angry that the priest did not say (she actually made a typo and left out the word 'not' - but we get her point) "How can I help you keep your family together? You know, food baskets, baby clothes, diapers, church volunteers? I just can't understand why that was not arranged."

Uh DUH - First - there was NO lack of baby supplies and clothes - until Doris was born, I was the youngest of three sisters. And a brother two years older than me. There were plenty of hand-me-down clothes. PLUS the fact that in early 1956 - there were other babies born in the family - Richard and Ann had my cousin Jimmy, my Uncle Henry and Aunt Bertha had Dennis, my Aunt Catherine had Gail. Siblings and siblings-in-law of my mom - so I'm sure there would have been plenty of diapers and other baby supplies. Food? oh for crying out loud! Joan/Doris makes it sound as my family was absolutely poverty stricken (she has said this in her libelous bullshit book) but that was not the case. My father worked as a draftsman in the street paving department for the city of Buffalo in Buffalo's city hall. Joan/Doris keeps forgetting that in the 1950's there were no daycare centers like we have now. There simply was no one to take care of her during the day while my father was at work. AND four other young children. -- Church volunteers. That's asking an awful lot from other church members - you're talking possibly 18 years of daytime babysitting for a family of 5 young kids.

But as I said above, Joan/Doris can't reconcile the fact that she was adopted. All these what ifs, all these maybes, all these judgments on my father, my stepmother (the woman he married a few months after my mom died, who needed a father for her two sons, but at the age of 36 did not want to take care of an infant), judging and condemning my aunt, her friend, a priest, other relatives, everyone in our neighborhood and church who didn't step up to the plate to save HER from being horribly adopted -- what's the fucking point?

Joan/Doris' tale of woe of her horrible adoption and the planting of the idea of adoption in my dad's head at the funeral of my mom - is nothing but Joan/Doris to get people to feel sorry for her. Even if and that's a big IF someone did approach him at a vulnerable time - he had ample time to change his mind. HE DID NOT. End of story. She was adopted, that's it.

AND of course, Joan/Doris tells her tale of woe with the lie about my mom's 'fictitious' high school diploma the very week of the anniversary of my mom's death. Why? Because she writes crap like this EVERY year around this time - because she knows I and my other sister Gert are reading her shit - she does it to hurt us. But fool that she is, she doesn't realize this does NOT hurt us - just because we write a rebuttal and point out Joan/Doris' lies and other bullshit, does not mean we are hurt - we are simply telling the truth about our mom, who is being continuously DISHONORED by this continuous bullshit that Joan/Doris spews out.

Another nonsense statement (lie) from Joan Wheeler/Doris Sippel about my mother

On March 20, 2018, the Buffalo News published a report from the Buffalo Catholic Diocese that named Catholic priests that have been accused of child abuse (sexual and otherwise). The report contained a list of 40 priests with accusations going back to the 1960’s. This was also reported on the local Buffalo television news stations.
http://buffalonews.com/2018/03/20/buffalo-diocese-names-priests-accused-of-abusing-minors/

I knew one of the priests named, in fact I, and one of my cousins, had done volunteer work under his guidance with mentally and physically handicapped children at West Seneca Developmental Center. In 1988 when he was first accused, I was in disbelief and defended him, but a week later he came forward and admitted to the accusations. I was so disillusioned. I wrote about it on my facebook page.

Doris Michol Sippel, formerly known as Joan Mary Wheeler decided to tell of her experiences with one of those priests on her facebook page. In her facebook post, Joan/Doris again engages in falsehoods about MY family. This blog post is to refute Joan/Doris' lies, misrepresentations, and total twisting of the facts surrounding the circumstances of MY mother’s wake, and MY father’s decision to relinguish Joan/Doris to adoption.

I have a screenshot of what she wrote (courtesy of a friend of mine, as I am blocked from Joan/Doris’ page and can’t see first hand of what she writes). I also have a screenshot of a subsequent comment of hers. These two screenshots are at the end of this post. I will not type out word for word what she said - that is why I have the screenshots here - but I will type out the sentences she said that I will refute.

In this post, I will address what she says in her initial post. In that post, she names the priest on the list that she knew when she was 12 years old. She goes out of her way to say that she was not a victim, that she witnessed the priest bullying other children. She then goes on to say “oh, and the story gets even better!” (what, are we all sitting around a campfire trying to tell tall tales?) She says "When I first met my father in 1974 (Senior year of high school), he showed me my natural mother's high school diploma. Yup. Signed by Joseph Schieder, circa 1942." She then goes on to say he had signed her own 8th grade graduation diploma, along with the Bishop.

Joan/Doris went to a Catholic grammar school, a Catholic high school, and a Catholic college. So all her diplomas would be signed by a Catholic priest/monsignior/bishop. However, my mother NEVER went to ANY Catholic school in her life!

Growing up in the Bailey/Walden section of Buffalo, her parish church was Holy Name of Jesus on Bailey Avenue. She attended religious instruction (the Catholic way of saying “Bible or Sunday School”) at Holy Name of Jesus school that was next door to the church. She went to grammar school at Buffalo Public School Number 9 that used to be on Bailey Ave. a little ways from Holy Name. My mother’s younger brother, Richard tells me they used to leave school, walk down Moeller Ave to the railroad tracks and follow them down to their street past Walden Ave.

My mother did NOT attend a Catholic high school either -- she went to EAST SIDE HIGH SCHOOL that was (still is) located at 820 Northampton St. behind what was then known as Humboldt Park, now known as Martin Luther King Park.
information of East High School, can be found at this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_High_School_(Buffalo,_New_York)

I have included below a screenshot of the first bit of that wiki article.

NO CATHOLIC PRIEST WOULD HAVE SIGNED ANY DIPLOMA FROM ANY STUDENT FROM BUFFALO PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

Also, NO one EVER signed my mother’s high school diploma -- because -- MY MOTHER NEVER GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL! How do I know this? Because her brother, my uncle Richard told me this just last week! And he should know -- HE WAS A FRESHMAN AT EAST WHEN MY MOM WAS A SENIOR - year - 1945. He said she did NOT graduate. Many girls of that era didn’t graduate because in that era, most girls didn’t aspire to careers, they wanted to be moms and housewives. I have her scrapbook and it is filled with newspaper and magazine articles and pictures of just what a young mom/housewife would have: pictures of cute little kids, kittens, how to please your hubby.

Really, up to the 1960’s if a girl in Buffalo wanted to have a career, the only career they were encouraged to go for was nursing - Buffalo Public High School Fosdick-Masten (now City Honors School) was for pre-nursing. Many of the girls did hands-on volunteer work as ‘Candy Stripers’ at the nearby Buffalo General Hospital, and when they graduated high school, went on to nursing school at Buffalo General’s on-campus nursing school. By the time I started working at BGH in 1972, the Candy Striper program had ended, the school of nursing saw a decline in attendance, closing forever about 20 years later. Bacause by then, girls were aspiring to a more variety of careers.

I also know that my mom attended Public School 9 -- because I have her class ring. I’ve had it since I was around 12 or 13 when my father gave it to me. And it says right on it -- Public School 9. I also have her prayer book that she received from Holy Name of Jesus Church when she received her First Holy Communion.

I am a member of Classmates dot com and they have on their website - many old yearbooks. I looked at the 1945 yearbook, the year that my uncle Richard was a freshman, and my mom was a senior. There is no senior picture of my mom. There is a picture of my uncle in the school’s Christmas play - Dicken’s “Christmas Story” in which Richard played Tiny Tim Cratchit. I have included the pictures of him as Tiny Tim, and a picture of the cast list that clearly says “Richard Herr.” Uncle Rich says he joined the Drama Club because my mom was in it.

So, Joan/Doris’ bullshit story about a Catholic priest signing my mother’s high school diploma is just that: BULLSHIT. She opens her mouth and the shit spews out. She doesn't care about facts, the truth, or anything but what her warped mind thinks happened. And because she's an adoptee, other so-called 'adult' adoptees think her word is golden - they are just as warped as she is. They think that an event from the 1940's and the 1950's can't be researched and proven. 

screenshot of Joan/Doris’ initial facebook post:

pictures from East High School yearbook 1945 - front page and of the Christmas show with my uncle Richard Herr:

screenshot of wiki article on East High School: