You almost outlined my point. It is undisputed that an abortion is a medical procedure (even if you consider it an execution). It is undisputed that being pregnant and making decisions related to the health and wellbeing of the mother involves medical decisions. The process of giving birth is a biological process that also involves making medical decisions.
The risks involved with being pregnant and giving birth, which are numerous and carry varying degree of likelihood and risk to life and limb, are exclusively experienced by the woman. Men have zero risk to their health associated with being pregnant and giving birth. Our risks are purely financial and at most emotional.
The pro-life position is based purely on assumption. Assumption that the fetus is a life with personhood (technically a virus or a bacteria can be considered a life. So can a skin cell or a fish. Personhood is what is paramount.) Assumption that the abortion ends the life. The speculation that the fetus will actually mature, survive, and thrive (Miscarriages, still births, and genetic defects are a possibility at almost any stage).
My position is actually a lot harsher than what you propose. It is my belief that a fetus, at any stage, is in fact a life or at the very least a potential life. I believe that abortion is the actual termination of that life/potential life. However, when I weight the life of the woman and the life of the fetus, I put more value in the life of the woman. She is conscious, sentient, and is legally and medically competent enough to make decisions as to her own body. Her actual personhood is more valuable in my eyes than the potential or speculative personhood of an unborn fetus. Which is why I state that it is irrelevant whether we consider the fetus to be a life.