If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
A CITIZEN’S ANALYSIS OF OBAMA’S LONG-FORM “BIRTH CERTIFICATE”
by Tracey M. Grissom
(May 14, 2011) — To be accurate, what we call a Long Form Birth Certificate should probably be referred to as “the top portion” of a long form birth certificate. The Center for Disease Control website informs us: “Federal law mandates national collection and publication of births.” So because the Federal government mandates that information to be collected, they also create a standard form for the states to use. In viewing the standard form, we see there is a great deal of information the hospital collects (parent’s race, details on the delivery, APGAR scores, abnormal conditions of the newborn, etc.) that we never get to see when requesting a copy of our birth certificate.
Once every 10 to 15 years, the standard form undergoes a revision, and to date there have been 11 such revisions of the standard birth certificate, with the most recent occurring in 2003. The 2003 model is the one in use today and it replaced the 1989 standard form. This citizen researcher tried to figure out what revision might have been in use in Hawaii in 1961 but couldn’t find that information, although perhaps someone else can. It’s complicated by the fact that when there is another revision, it takes the states a few years to completely switch over to the new form. They have to print and distribute them to the hospitals, and while some states seem to be quicker at it than others, others take a few years.
The records are used to compile statistics that provide indicators of growing social problems (for example, broken families and births to unwed mothers), so the form changes according to the statistics which the The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) need. In previous decades, whether children were born in an urban area or a remote, sparsely populated area may have been a major factor in infant death rates. So they ask detailed questions about that. But in latter years the CDC and NCHS might decide the highest education levels attained by the parents is a major indicator of problems so they gather that information. Just as a side note, according to the Revised Standards for Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity issued by the Office of Management and Budget in 1997, mothers were to be offered the option of selecting one or more racial designations. I had wondered why later birth certificates seen posted on the internet sometimes had an entire sentence of race classification where earlier ones had one word.
More information on revisions is found here : http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vital_certificate_revisions.htm
While my research hasn’t completely answered all the questions I have concerning the long form birth certificate in use in 1961, I can draw some conclusions of what might be true with the latest edition to the growing “Obama Collection of Birth Certificates.” For example, to the right of –#9 Race of Father– there’s a marking that appears to be a penciled-in– handwritten number 9. Could it be a residual notation left over from when someone added a little note to remind himself (or someone else) of what exactly to type in that space? On the 2003 Revision under Father’s Race, I count 14 different classifications plus *Other (Specify), making a total of 15. But in 1961 could there have been fewer with *Other (Specify), making number nine (9)? I think it’s quite possible because behind “Stanley Ann Dunham, Race of Mother –Caucasian” there appears to be a little penciled-in one (1) and I’m fairly certain White or Caucasian has always in any American era been the first classification. In checking with the images of the Nordyke twins’ birth certificates, there also is what appears to be a number (1) penciled in behind “Caucasian.”
Another possibility that occurred to me is that the little pencil notes might be an internal coding system indicating which information needed further verification or guidance, perhaps something on a scale of 1 to 9 meaning a 1 or 2 is fairly certain, practically self-evident, but a 9 is raising red flags or uncertainties and needs more proof.
I also have concluded by carefully looking at the Standard Form that all the discussion after the 2008 release of the Obama COLB about “Africa” is a continent and not a racial classification, while true, probably doesn’t apply because the form states that the information taker is to check whichever box indicates what the father or mother considers themselves to be. Besides, the racial classifications apply to Americans filling out American documents (and have been abused in the past to racially label people), but would they apply to a foreign national here on a student visa? If you’ve had a chance to look at Obama Senior’s immigration files you probably noticed his race is listed as Africa or Kenya there too. If someone asks “what race are you?” and the respondent answers “Africa” –does the person taking the information have the legal right to determine something else? Not really! Maybe change the answer “Africa” to “African” as seems to be the case with the latest Obama BC, but probably nothing more.
The more I look at Obama’s latest birth certificate, the more I am inclined to think it retains items from a Standard Long Form Certificate of Live Birth signed by his mother at the time of his birth. In other words, it’s partially abstracted from an original source document. But if it couldn’t be stamped with the straightforward “an exact and true copy” stamp, but instead required the “this is a true copy or an abstract” stamp, it probably means –IT IS AN ABSTRACT. Plain and simple, pieces taken from one original source document married to bits and pieces from another original source document to create a hybrid document reflecting what is true now.
Just beneath the surface it shows his mother’s signature being pasted together in two parts. It’s “(Stanley) Ann D” and then in a separate layer… unham Obama. Is it possible the Hawaii Department of Health had to piece that signature together to make it comply with the new law effective April 1, 2011?
Beginning April 1, 2011, the U.S. Department of State will require the full names of the applicant’s parent(s) to be listed on all certified birth certificates to be considered as primary evidence of U.S. citizenship for all passport applicants, regardless of age. Certified birth certificates missing this information will not be acceptable as evidence of citizenship. This will not affect applications already in-process that have been submitted or accepted before the effective date.
Did his mother sign the standard birth form (Stanley) Ann D. Obama, adding the Stanley as an after-thought? Is it possible that in order to comply with the above requirement and be able to certify it, HDOH could leave the (Stanley) Ann D part; that was fine, but it had to have “Dunham,” not just “D,” so they pulled the “unham Obama” from a later document?
On the internet Obama has quite the collection of birth certificates. I wonder if he has an equal number of source documents in the secret hiding place in which Hawaii keeps his records? Maybe instead of calling him “The One,” his supporters should call him “The Re-born One”? Just a Suggestion.