The ‘oh, he was born at home’ would certainly be reasonable if you wanted to claim he was born in Hawaii (ie: American since I’m sure Toot knew the immigration laws at the time which said he wouldn’t even be a citizen at all if he was born outside the US) and not have to provide a hospital record.
Dr’s palms could have been greased to be the signing doctor.
If it really is a "4" we are looking at and if we are reading the right instruction manual, then I don't think there even WAS a signing doctor if "4" was used.
No money necessary...The signature was more of a “the information on this form is as it was given to me” type. It was NOt a verification of that material only... Like a witness signs a will.
Now see, this is the kind of stuff I just don't like. There is no need to invoke graft or conspiracy when the truth will do just fine. According to what I have read in Hawaiian law, a parent has up to a year (regarding an at home birth) to bring the child in for an examination by a medical doctor. The doctor may then sign the birth certificate and is thereafter regarded as the "birth" doctor. The facility he works at is then regarded as the "birth" facility.
Let us stop suggesting that state officials or Medical professionals would engage in lying or deception unless substantial proof exists that they would do so, or that doing so is in fact legal and necessary for them under the circumstances. (Such as in the case of adoptions where state officials are legally REQUIRED to lie and create false documents regarding the particulars of a child's birth.)