There have been, over the years, a few remarks made by Ms Wheeler and her friends, casting aspersions as to my intentions for writing this blog. I was clearing out some files, and came across the original post by Ms W, and the subsequent correspondence which led to me starting this blog. It is all here, with a few of my ‘white-outs’ of personal information not pertaining to the subject.
You will see:
Scans 1-4 The original post by JW, the title of which caught my eye whilst surfing the net on Jewish topics, and not her by name: On the Close of Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement. You will see Ms Wheeler twists Yom Kippur to be an opportunity for her adversaries to apologise to her and seek her forgiveness, which is not exactly what Yom Kippur is all about.
Scan5 My comment, which as anyone can see is solely for the point of clarity over the true meaning of Yom Kippur, not accusation, and certainly not mentioning Ms Wheeler’s family situation, which was not the focus of my comment.
Scans 5/6 Her response to me, as Chayelet, before she realised who I really was.
Scan 7 Her, unsolicited by me, personal email to me. The whited-out paragraphs refer to private individuals Ms Wheeler wanted me to contact on her behalf (no, she’s not a user, is she). Note how she actually thanks me for reading her blog, and how she ‘had a feeling we’d re-connect..’. So much for wanting ‘no contact’. Nowhere in this letter, by the way, does she ask after my welfare, or show any interest in my life- same old, same old.
Scan 8 My email to WordPress regarding her unprofessional behaviour in contacting me.
WordPress’s response is unknown- but Ms Wheeler did post an abusive response to me, which was taken down along with the entire correspondence by either herself or WordPress, before I had the chance to print it out.
I believe this will end the speculation as to the ‘abuse’ Ms Wheeler claims I gave her. I merely wanted to give her a greater understanding of the true meaning of Yom Kippur. I wish I’d never bothered.
As for me, my way of dealing with those early traumas -mother’s death, placements and serious personality clashes with my father, was to move to the UK.I had made my decision as early as 1965, aged 17. I moved here in 1973 and have been too involved with building and sustaining my life here to be anything but a bystander in this whole reunion thing, and I made that quite clear to JW from the very start. Gert and Ruth speak about a time when JW TURNED against them.Both times it was when Ruth and/or Gert said NO to JW. Same with me. I saw from our very first days together that JW was a user but it was 1988 when her demands for a free ride on a 3rd visit were just a bit too intrusive. I did not ring her to tell her to stay home- she stayed home because her kids were sick (quite rightly) and common sense prevailed. But because I would not offer her free food and lodgings, her attitude toward me changed dramatically.
Certain ‘acquaintances’ in the UK had to terminate budding friendships with her because of her incessant phoning up at 3 am local time, asking for favours, etc. None of that had anything to do with me ‘bad-mouthing’ JW. She did it all by herself.
And now, with these few lines, I believe I have covered everything about me that JW has issues with, except for the Rene Hoksbergen incident circa 1992 to which Ruth and Gert have alluded in previous posts, and so there really, truly, and officially is nothing left for me to say on this subject.
Lest readers take my hitherto silence to be a sign that I have capitulated to JW’s demands for my silence-I would like to add my support to what Ruth and Gert say in the Refuting Blog. On 20 Sept 2010 I posted on Chayelet’s Blog a final statement- to clarify this statement, I will quote Ruth, above: ‘I can only protect my life and my heart from being hurt by JW again’
My sisters Ruth and Gert have suffered more than I at JW’s hands, and thus have much more to refut than I do. I have addressed directly most of the issues relating to me, and have given Gert and Ruth permission to quote me when appropriate.
The reasons for my silence are:
1. My life is NOT an open book, for public consumption
2. I do not believe in exploiting the people or situations in my life
3. I know from first hand experience that trying to deal with people like JW is futile, and, as I have already dealt with JW’s issues with me, I leave it to her to come to terms with her perceptions of me.
Chayelet’s Blog will stay in situ.
I REFUSE TO BE MANIPULATED INTO TAKING THE BAIT OFFERED BY MS WHEELER. LET HER OWN STATEMENTS BE HER TESTIMONY-NOT MINE.
I, Katherine Inglis, formerly known as Katherine Jean Sippel, also known as Kathy Inglis,also known as Chayelet, of Liverpool, England, formerly of Buffalo, New York USA, by this notice, give Formal and Permanent Notification of My Disassociation from the Person named in the title above, and all her Agents. Since her relinquishment to adoption in 1956 there has been no LEGAL reason for association. An amicable reunion was voluntarily attempted by both parties in 1976 which was not entirely successful and the Author of this Notice, i.e. myself, has had no desire for association, except for necessity, since 1979. It is unfortunate that, in view of Ms Wheeler/Sippel’s continuous efforts to slander and libel me in private and in public, and in writing via her authorship of a very misleading book, I feel it necessary to take this action. I do so as an act of self-preservation- to preserve my integrity, my sanity, and above all, my freedom from tyranny. I will be seeking legal advice to make this a LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT, internationally, and for all time.
I urge readers to read the About page-click About.
With regard to my comment on your post ‘On the Conclusion of Yom Kippur…’. I am sorry that you chose to misunderstand my intention-which was merely to point out the correct purpose and customs of observing this most holy day in the Jewish calendar.I wrote that comment in good faith, and not with an accusing finger, but I cannot control how you choose to interpret it. I wrote using my username, as I am entitled to do. As regards your unprofessional conduct in contacting me on my private email address, and your further posts regarding my comment, all I can say is – I did not use my religion to get at you or bait you- you yourself chose to use an observance of my religion as the headline and basis for your blog. I must point out to you that I and my co-religionists take a very dim view of people of any denomination, and none, who choose to appropriate and misrepresent our faith and customs. I was glad to read in your first response that you seemed to welcome my attempt to provide you with a deeper understanding, and had you left it at that, all would be fine.
I understand your blog is about adoption reform and I respect that, however, I will reiterate to you that YOU chose to headline your post using religious terminology. As to the rest of your comments regarding your family issues, I did not make any reference to those in my original comment and I will not now.
The purpose of this open letter is not to intensify this situation but to publicly defend myself against your unwarranted public display of animosity. This will be the only post I will leave and I will not read or respond to any comments left.