Unfortunately, existential issues like abortion are inherently paradoxes and thus, filled with logical inconsistencies. Every birth represents a collection of possibilities.
As a political agnostic, the passionate opinions grounded in ideology from both sides are disturbing.
Saying that pro-life supporters are disingenuous because they don't want to provide social support for the births in question is a leap in logic and conflates conservative approaches toward resolving social problems with a sort of pathalogical disinterest at best, and evil intent at worse.
More disturbing, using situational rationale to justify abortion so society can avoid unwanted children isn't logically defensible and thus, open to criticism. For example, what happens if the right suddenly decides to create robust social support programs as a way to disarm opposition against pro-life positions. Your argument evaporates.
Perhaps more critically, the liberal rationale justifying abortion as an acceptable solution to "unwanted" pregnancies can lead to unintended outcomes. Imagine for a moment we find ourselves at the bottom of that slippery slope. Society now decides that it is better to euthanize a child whose particular developmental arc suggests they will somehow be flawed enough to represent, in the aggregate, a social burden. To remove them from society is presumed to be a social good.
Before you reflexively begin thinking this would never happen, reflect on the number of times in history this has already happened.
We are perfectly capable of imagining classes of humans who are, in some way, deficient and undeserving of the rights extended to others. Slavery, Nazi Germany, etc. etc.
If you are repulsed at the idea of euthanizing a twelve-year-old child because they show signs of becoming a "burden" to society, consider that may be the exact emotional feeling pro-live supporters have about abortion.
From gestation to death, we are all a work in progress. There is no dark line delineating valued from unvalued human life. It's all subjective. Arguing over who's subjective position is "right" and who's is "wrong" is a fool's errand.
Until we all admit this is a paradox without answers we cannot hope to craft any sort of compromise.