Question 1
If one has a baby at home, don’t they need to go to the hospital afterwards to have the baby checked out and to have the mother cleaned and taken care of?
Question 2 for butter
Did the person who saw the record without Obama take a picture of it?
I suggest you contact the AP reporter and ask him to get the records. I find it interesting that a AP reporter is looking into the birth index matter too, at this time. If they receive a record without Obama in it, it would be more credible than if you found it, providing he actually released same.
Question 1: Yes. My sister has had all but 2 of her 7 children at home, and after the birth she and the baby have both been seen by a doctor. Hawaii allowed 30 days for the baby to be examined by a doctor who would complete the BC if the birth was not attended. The CDC’s Natality Report in 1961 said that if a child was born in conveyance and taken to the hospital the birthplace was to be listed as the hospital and it was to be called an attended birth.
This is probably why Obama’s amendment to the BC is so critical. Besides making the BC legally invalid, it would also show that he was not seen by a Hawaii doctor within the first 30 days. Shows his claim of birth at Kapiolani a total fib, and begs the question of why he didn’t see a Hawaii doctor within the first 30 days. Also begs the question of what BC he’s been using his whole life, since he didn’t have a valid one from Hawaii that he could use.
Question 2: No, he didn’t get a picture of it. What the HDOH now shows in their office has Obama’s name on it. But there are several significant signs of tampering with the electronic file. I believe that what they show in their office is a report based on the 1960-64 birth index but with several records manipulated, and that they don’t want to release the real thing because they can’t get a page printed with all the validating marks that includes Obama’s name.
I also believe they are afraid to release the birth index because if more looking was done we would have the documentation we need in order to prove other various manipulations they have done with the records.
There are 2 documents I have received from the HDOH which have what I know now are signs of manipulation of the electronic record. In addition, they are supposed to be copies of pages from the 1960-64 birth index book and 1960-65 marriage index book but they have been taken from a 3-ring binder as evidenced by the marks on the copy. That tells me that they were not taken from the actual index books at their office, since those are 2-hole computer binders. It also tells me that they didn’t simply print out a one-time copy of a single page and send it off to me. The pages I requested were not for Obama and it is doubtful that they have gotten many, if any, other requests for those pages so there is no reason for them to keep a copy in a 3-ring binder because of the many requests they receive.
I’ve offered to keep Niesse informed on the issues, but he doesn’t seem willing to delve into it. Seems like his bosses wanted a puff piece for Obama’s birthday, nothing more.
Q1) in 1961 it wasn’t terribly uncommon for babies to be born at home. There really were babies born in Hawaii that way. And no people might well have only had family members take care of the mother and baby if all went well. The state only required a “witness” signature along with that of the person registering the birth and bingo, birth certificate.
Q2) that is a question for Butter. I don’t have any info on that at all.