I think we're looking at this issue the wrong way. The decision that was created by Roe v Wade was a legally weak case. The idea that abortion would become a fundamental right based on a medical right to privacy is fraught full of legal holes.
A). There is no constitutional guarantee that anyone is entitled to a medical procedure.
B). I don't think, after what we just experienced with COVID, that anyone can claim our right to medical privacy is sacrosanct. Ask anyone who has been denied a transplant based on their lifestyle or health choices.
C). If we are going to treat the termination of a human life as a medical procedure, then we have to address the fact that more than half the states still have laws on the books equating the illegal termination of a fetus as feticide , a capital crime. It can't be both.
The 1973 USSC decision was much more politically based than legally based. Instead of judging the decision based on interpretation of The Constitution, the jurist re-interpreted existing amendments to achieve a desired outcome.
It doesn't matter where you stand on this matter ... if it isn't decided according to law, in accordance with The Constitution, it will never have true legal standing and will always be subject to reversal.