A Tidbit

I was looking over some Vital Stats Regulations from the year 1961, and did find wherein (or maybe it’s “therein” 🙂 )  the rules that the Honolulu Vital Stats office followed when they sent birth/death/marriage information to the newspapers to be printed, it’s near the bottom. 2.2 List of Events.

WHOOPS! It was brought to my attention (thank you Butter) that the page displayed below is actually from a section of the regs that was dated in 1976 (Chapter 8b).  The 1962 dated section (Chapter 8) is now posted below the more contemporary page.  It shows us that the “List of Events” was repealed in 1962, and in the 1962 regulation it does not include the sentence about providing the list to the newspaper on request.  Did they do it that way in 1961?  Almost certainly.  They just didn’t have it spelled out in the rule book prior to the repeal.  I FORMALLY APOLOGIZE FOR MY SCREW-UP!

Charo asked; How do you read “by providing the same to local newspapers upon request”: the parent’s request or the newspapers?

I take it to mean that it would be at the request of the newspapers.  For this to be published in the paper would require consent by at least one of the birth parents, which explains why not every birth that occurred was announced in the newspaper.  I did not come across any that were sans address – so, parental approval would have been a factor for inclusion in the newspaper Vital Stats birth announcements.

Click to enlarge:



~ by ladysforest on March 5, 2011.

16 Responses to “A Tidbit”

  1. Interesting:
    No illegitimate births to be provided to newspapers or posted.
    One parent must approve including address with birth list posted or sent to newspapers.

    • They weren’t allowed to post/print anything embarrassing.

      • BHO would have been illegitimate if not for the “arranged marriage.” His birth announcement, if the truth be known, should not have appeared in the newspapers.

        One parent approval for publication of an address brings up a question: which “parent” or person representing the parent gave the approval to publish the announcement. A parent would have been Stanley Anne or Barrack Sr. If Stanley Anne was in Washington, she couldn’t give approval. Would Barrack Sr. have given permission, assuming his name was on whatever was filed with the health department? Would Madelyn have stepped in and claimed to represent her daughter? Or was approval assumed unless a specific request was made to omit the address. After all, the address was in the polk.

        • The one parent approval is IF the information was sent from the DOH Vital Stats. The regs state that at least one parent had to give the approval for the address, and I never came across any announcements that did not include the address. So, clearly the address is the key as to whether or not the birth announcements got into the paper from the DOH list of events.
          Parents, I am certain, could call, or otherwise request for those to be printed also. It is still allowed these days for a call in addition in the birth announcements.
          But coming from an official source required certain rules be followed by the official source-those same rules did not apply to the newspapers own guidelines for inclusion.

      • Stanley Anne was still a minor when Mr. O was born. She wasn’t really married. Could her mother act legally on her behalf, as though she had a power of attorney?

        • Only if she was in fact unmarried, and then I don’t think she had full control. Could be wrong on that though.
          I think if she was married at 17, her parent(s) would have had to sign a consent form. Unless HI didn’t require it for some reason. Once the parents signed off and she married, parents had no power left.

  2. How do you read “by providing the same to local newspapers upon request”: the parent’s request or the newspapers?

    • I’m reading it as “to the newspaper”. The reason I say that is because a qualifying condition of it being posted with address requires at least one parent to approve in order for their info to even be included. I never saw a single one that did not include the address, so I am going out on a limb here and saying that the parents that opted out of including their address did perhaps go on the lists that were posted, but were not published in the newspaper.

  3. Isn’t the prevailing theory by the cutting edge researchers (ah-hem) that the newspaper announcements of Obama’s (or whatever his real name is) birth were completely fabricated within the last several years (i.e., no contemporaneous announcements originating from the HDOH were generated)? That is, all the newspaper announcements are modern forgeries. Isn’t that considered to be the most likely scenario? (Because the guy currently squatting in our White House is a complete and total fraud!!)

    I will not be satisfied until he is charged with treason, run through due process and appropriately punished (and you know what I think that ought to be…).

    • Yes, it is one theory. It is possible, and I say this because of my own hands on in person up front and personal research. :).

  4. I would think the simple answer would be to find paper copies of the newspaper – that would at least put to rest the issue of any microfilm tampering.

    It still wouldn’t confirm where the data for the newspaper originated from – I’ve read that it was perhaps submitted by the grandparents, just to get it in the papers, but that it didn’t have to originate from a hospital birth.

    • No one has come forward with an original newspaper. It is discussed often, but one has never turned up.

  5. And what about finding any other people born around the same time in either hospital? Because what I think is going on is that the “original” birth certificate that HI officials have sworn they’ve seen, is really just the original of the COLB. In other words, they are not lying, they’ve seen the original document that we’ve all seen as a scanned doc. They choose their words carefully. Please tell me where I can find someone who has sworn they have seen the long form, and can report from memory all of the details on that form, including the name/and or signature of the doctor, the hospital name, full addresses, occupations of parents, and/or real particulars normally found on a long form. They don’t have to reveal to us what that private information is, just tell us that they have read it, it absolutely exists without a doubt. And if this person is a HI state official, I will take their word for it. But I have not hear this yet. Who has read the long form and retained its information in their head… so clearly that it would be spilled out under hypnotism or truth serum.

    And what do Hawaiians say privately about this? Surely gossip abounds… someone knows something and they are keeping quiet.

    • I think they are not referencing a “long from birth certificate” either. They parse every statement, and would not need to do so if they had actually seen one.

      Gossip I hear is that the locals know he doesn’t have a bc, and they really don’t care. They kinda hate the mainland people.

  6. Yes, that is my thinking exactly. Have any reporters ever asked those who claim to have seen the original “vault” certificate if it has more/different information from the COLB, and if they can tell us if that original form is called something else, for example a Certificate (not Certification)?

    As for the locals, I am not being silly, but it seems as though the so-called unscripted TV show filmed in Hawaii,”Dog, The Bounty Hunter,” indicates there are plenty of locals who would gladly take money for information if asked by a trusted local person. I realize they don’t care much for Haoles.

    • No reporters asked a darn thing, they just accepted and repeated what was told to them.

      I thought about that whole Bounty Hunter thing too, LOL, the problem is that the sort of people that would take the money aren’t the type that will go into a Government building and poke through records – and be honest about having done it. It is one thing to take a 50 and say, “Yeah, he’s down the street at the park”, and another to go into the Dept. of Health, stand in line for an hour, hand over your ID, go look through thick books for one little name ——– you get the idea.

      If we had ENOUGH money to get a really dependable person to go in for us, then we had enough to send in one of our own. Which is what I did. That way if something unexpected came up, we could come up with a work around. And some things you find give you more things to look for. It’s more complex than it seems on the surface.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: