And I would add to your comment that if it IS the genuine and relevant manual for this purpose, it appears we are looking at a birth document that was originally filed as a home birth and later forged to indicate a hospital birth.
So it’s another box that has been altered. why did no one notice or did they notice and not comment at the news conference.
...it appears...
It appears that you're going to keep trying to push that square peg through the round hole, no matter what anyone says, based solely on conjecture since you can't use a manual that wasn't in effect at the time.
You can't presume that the coding was the same thing before the revision was made. You need the manual covering the time frame in question.