Replies

HRS 118-17.7 (at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0007.htm ) says that when an adoption takes place a new birth certificate is created and the original is sealed. This doesn’t require any amendment. If the adoption is set aside the original birth certificate is restored and the adoptive birth certificate is sealed. So when there’s an adoption nothing is amended. There are just 2 different birth certificates and whichever one is in effect is the one that is accessible to the HDOH; the other is sealed and cannot be accessed without a court order.

I have asked to see the court order by which the HDOH was authorized to see Obama’s original BC and was told there was no record responsive to my request. If so, then what Fukino talked about seeing (in her July 2009 announcement) would have to be the last status of Obama. It also means that the “original birth certificate” she said they have on record (in her Oct 2008 announcement) would have to be his current status as well - under the name of Barack Hussein Obama II.

In the case where the actual paternity of the child is changed the original BC is amended, but then that BC is sealed. A new birth certificate showing the new paternity is created. My understanding is that a new certificate would not show any amendment having occurred, since the point of the new birth certificate is to hide embarrassing information.

So whatever amendment shows on Obama’s current birth certificate, it doesn’t regard paternity, adoption, illegitimacy, or a sex change. Those cases get a brand-new birth certificate, with no amendments noted and the legal validity of the birth certificate intact.