Celebrating a gruesome profession: After Tiller acclaimed at Sundance
One may think, based on its title, that the film After Tiller is a tribute to the lives that were lost at the end of abortionist George Tiller’s forceps, or that it’s a testimony reminding us that pro-lifers contradict themselves when they attempt to answer violence with violence (as was the case in this late-term abortionist’s murder). Perhaps, even, one might think that a film with this title is about the hotly debated topic of what is going to happen with Tiller’s Kansas abortion business now that he’s gone.
But it seems unlikely that anyone – on either side of the abortion debate – would have expected the film to be an approving commemoration of Tiller’s gruesome profession. Considering how few Americans approve of late-term abortion, it is even more shocking that this film was met with such acclaim at the Sundance Film Festival, where the stars of the show – late-term abortionists – were received with admiration and support.
The four abortionists (three pictured on the right with George Tiller) had a photo op at the Festival, and most of them could be seen smiling away as they celebrated their horrific daily work.
After Tiller chronicles the daily lives of four late-term abortionists (LeRoy Carhart, Warren Hern, Shelly Sella, and Susan Robinson, dubbed “the last four” in the United States) in the wake of George Tiller’s murder. Attempting to incite in the viewer a twisted sympathy for the challenges that these abortionists face in carrying out their businesses, the film conveniently sets aside the dangers to the mother, violence to the child, and emotional aftermath to all involved that third-trimester abortions perpetrate.
Not only has After Tiller been praised; it has afforded these last four late-term abortionists in the U.S. a kind of celebrity status so ironic that it brings to mind images of the twisted support of the Third Reich for Dr. Mengele, the Holocaust’s “Angel of Death.” The production company states that the film was made “in the name of choice,” and one of the co-directors states that “part of the reason [the abortionists] agreed to participate in this film was actually to show that they are proud of the work that they do[.]”
Perhaps the most ironic element to the film is the fact that it attempts to incite a sense of compassion and concern for these late-term abortionists when they go to work every day to rip apart fully formed, viable babies piece by bloody piece.
Who should really be frightened in this scenario: the abortionist, or his victim?