Replies

Stanley Ann may not have had to DO anything. I have read quite a bit from others on this subject. It is my current understanding that Under 1960s Indonesian law, a child is AUTOMATICALLY adopted if he is under the age of five when his mother Marries an Indonesian citizen. (Here is the law in effect at that time.) The only requirement is that the father must identify the child as his in front of a government official who comes to the house.

But that doesn't sound like something our government would recognize. In fact, your "adoption" of Barack sounds a lot like my "non-adoption." How likely is it that something like this would have gotten back to the State Department or the Hawaiian Department of Health and meant a change in his passport or birth certificate. From what we know, it's not at all clear that such an "adoption" or "non-adoption" would have meant any change at all in Obama's citizenship.

In fact, it probably wouldn't have. I'm not sure about the exact law at the time, but nowadays the child (if he had reached the right age) would have had to swear before a US official that he was abandoning his citizenship, and I'd be willing to bet that never happened (though we won't know for years if it did or if it didn't). If you want to argue that Obama was adopted and this changed his passport or his citizenship or his birth certificate, a very informal or irregular "adoption" makes your case weaker than a more correct and formal adoption would.

SHE may not have been much for paperwork, but Bank Vice President Madelyn Dunham lived by it. I have little doubt she sought legal advice for what to do.

One problem with all the theorizing is that people have an ability to compartmentalize their lives. The woman who's a tiger about paperwork at work, may not want forms and red-tape cluttering up her relationships with her children and grandchildren. I can't say for sure what if anything happened, but I suspect the laxity of the two Stanleys and Madeline's maternal feelings could have outweighed any desire to formalize or legalize their guardianship through adoption. As I've said, though, it would have been possible to become the child's guardians without going so far as to adopt him.

It makes sense that his financier for the trip (and the Hotel Room where he stayed) was Madelyn Dunham, Vice President of the Bank. If this is the case, then his presence must have been necessary for some reason, and I can only assume it was to sign legal documents and affirm before a Judge.

That's possible, but as I've said, we want to make other people far simpler than they are in fact, especially if we don't like them. That's part of what I meant by "compartmentalization": a bank VP isn't always a bank VP in all her interactions and relationships. It's not impossible that family troubles and uncertainties got to the point where they felt -- however silly it might have looked later on -- that Barack Sr would have been a positive influence on Barack II.

But one thing you might already know: the Soetoros did adopt Lia, an Indonesian girl. If they legally and formally adopted Lia it might lend support to your theory. But once again, it's something we won't know about for years to come, if even then.

This is a good question, and it depends on a lot of factors. My understanding is that Lolo married Ann in 1965, but didn't go back to Indonesia till later. If he married her in Hawaii, he may very well have adopted Barry in Hawaii. Would Ann have insisted on it? Again, it depends.

If Lolo didn't adopt him in Hawaii, would an Indonesian adoption be a problem for Barry? There's evidence that in 1968 it might have caused a little problem with Ann's Passport. My understanding is that this was when Barry was being taken off her passport and required to get one of his own.

From what we know, it's not at all clear that such an "adoption" or "non-adoption" would have meant any change at all in Obama's citizenship.

I'm not suggesting it changed his citizenship, i'm suggesting that it may have complicated his life by creating issues, questions, and confusion about it. It is my understanding that a guardian cannot revoke the citizenship of their children, and that the citizenship will always be available to be claimed at a later date. However, the Guardian can make a mess of their documentation by naturalizing them into another country.

One way to undo this mess may have been an adoption or legal guardianship.

For this issue, there is a probability tree with many branches. The strength or weakness of my adoption theory will depend on which branch was actually traversed. Right now, we are speculating based on what we CAN discover. There are several pieces of evidence to indicate that Barack Obama was actually adopted under Indonesian law. What the effects of this may be regarding American law are not readily apparent. There is a possibility that he was adopted under Hawaiian law, and if that is actually the case, then that WOULD have serious legal consequences for him.

*IF* Barack Sr. was flown to Hawaii for some legal purpose involving Barry, then it reinforces the notion that the Indonesian or Hawaiian adoption needed undoing.

Others have pointed this out as well. Again, I regard this as a probability tree. Each subsequent piece tends to depend heavily on a previous not clearly known piece, and the divergent branches can have wildly different consequences. It may very well be that a legal guardianship may have been all that is necessary, but I think it is an odd coincidence that Stanley Ann and Barack Sr. just happened to be in Hawaii at the same time (both normally living thousands of miles away) and when they both left, Barry remained with his Grandparents thereafter.

Christmas 1971.

Here is a good source for details regarding this event.

I think more will come out. I don't know if it will all come out, but it enough might. There are a lot of eyes looking at this issue.