In justifying abortions over 30 weeks, abortionist Susan Robinson continues to inadvertently reveal the truth

By Dave Andrusko

Abortionist Susan Robinson

Abortionist Susan Robinson

Ask yourself why would an Irish publication call one of the four American abortionists who will openly abort after 30 weeks? In this case it’s the Irish Independent’s Caitriona Palmer who phoned Susan Robinson, whose late abortion clinic is in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

There are two obvious answers. We have written several times about the documentary “After Tiller,” in which (a) Robinson and three others are placed on a pedestal for aborting huge babies, and (b) abortionist George Tiller, killed in 2009, is glorified as one of the pioneers of this grisly trade.

Tomorrow “After Tiller” will be shown at the Irish Film Institute. Perfect timing.

Another reason may be that Ireland’s once firmly pro-life law on abortion has been breached. (Not surprisingly, this was made possible largely by a lie.  See “Savita Halappanavar Died Due to Litany of Failures, Health Information and Quality Authority Report Confirms.”)

There is currently an effort to include more grounds for abortion and anyone who has followed abortion “reform” knows when pro-abortionists sense weakness, they push to remove one “impediment” after another until they have attained abortion on demand. That Robinson “scoffs” at that possibility hardly comes as a shock.

Whatever the combination of reasons, every time Robinson gives an interview, she undercuts the rationales and rationalizations that are presented as justifications to abort babies who have long since passed the point of viability.

For example, three weeks ago in “Abortionist Susan Robinson says ‘other doctors look down on you and think of you as like the lowest of the low’” we learned that Robinson offered a bevy of extenuating circumstances—excuses—to get around the simple truth that she will abort some unspecified percentage of huge, mature babies for reasons most people would not believe are commensurate with the gravity of killing a viable unborn baby.

Last week, in “Abortionist Susan Robinson and snapping third-trimester photos in ‘a grotesquely morbid way,’” we learned that Robinson did not know about the long list of parents ready to adopt children with Down syndrome AND that, “I think that the public perceives first of all that late abortion could be completely eliminated if people would only get their act together and have their abortions earlier, which is completely untrue.”

In her interview with Caitriona Palmer, Robinson outdoes herself, so to speak, in a wholly negative way. What does Robinson admit this time? Here are just five examples:

#1. “Determined to carry on his [Tiller’s] legacy, the women packed up and moved their practice to New Mexico, one of the few remaining states that places no limits on the gestational age of a fetus that can be aborted.” (The other female abortionist is her friend, Shelley Sella.)

#2. How loose are the criteria for aborting these babies? “Many others who come to Robinson are carrying fetuses destined to be too ill or disabled to live productive lives outside of the womb.” By “productive lives,” you know Robinson is talking about babies with Down syndrome and babies with maladies that are not fatal.

#3. Who are these women? “They come in all ages, they come in all shapes and sizes, they come in all sorts of ethnicities, they come speaking all sorts of languages,” says Robinson. “Some are married. Some are unmarried. Some are having their first abortion, some are having their second or third. You can’t categorise them.” (Emphasis mine.)

#4. What are the abortion “techniques”? Depending on the baby’s age, they are first poisoned with Digoxin and then torn apart, or poisoned and then delivered in-tact by induction.

#5. What’s the margin of error in dating these babies’ ages? Read this:

“For pregnancies above 30 weeks Robinson relies on an ultrasound to check the age of the fetus but admits that this notoriously inaccurate method, combined with the often hazy conception dates provided by the women, can produce a window of error of plus or minus three weeks.

“’Let’s say the woman is at 31 weeks,’ Robinson says, ‘well, given the inaccuracy of the ultrasound she could perfectly be 34 weeks. How would I feel if that happened?’

“And it has happened.

“Robinson still recalls the shock she felt when she terminated the pregnancy of a fetus she thought was approximately 32 weeks. But when she saw the aborted body she realised that it was more like 37 weeks. She was devastated. ‘It was quite a moment,’ she remembers.”

“It was quite a moment”?

“After Tiller” will no doubt win certain awards and be nominated for others. Robinson should receive a different kind of award for dispelling some of the mythology that pro-abortionists have conjured up about “late” abortions.

Please join those who are following me on Twitter at Send your comments to