The Consent Model of Pregnancy would resist legal challenges better than Roe v. Wade. It would also give men equal rights to paternal surrender. However it was never adopted by pro-choice proponents specifically because it would give men equal rights, and that decision is now backfiring.

Roe v. Wade relied on legally questionable arguments to justify abortion. And many legal scholars, including pro-choice legal scholars, have known for decades that it would eventually be overturned.

As a result, several alternative strategies have been developed, but very few have been pursued. This is because most of them also give men equal rights to "financial abortions" that would absolve a father from paying child support if he didn't want a child.

One popular legal argument is known as the consent model of pregnancy. It was proposed in 1996 by Eileen McDonagh, but has remained controversial because it would treat mothers and fathers the same way under the law. However, this legal argument is much stronger than the argument used in Roe v. Wade, and likely would not be overturned if we were to formalize this legal strategy.

There's a good overview of this legal strategy in a paper called The Consent Model of Pregnancy: Deadlock Undermined by Mary Ford if you want to see how this works.

https://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/article/the-consent-model-of-pregnancy-deadlock-undiminished/

The author of this paper tentatively argues in favor of male abortions but quotes literature that suggests giving men the same rights as women was a stumbling block for adopting it. It was even something that Eileen McDonagh tried to find a way around when she originally proposed the strategy.

It's superior to current legal strategies because it does not depend on defining personhood. What that means is that we can all agree that a fetus is a living breathing human being deserving of the same rights as a child, and still argue that abortion has legal justification under current laws and frameworks. In essence, it argues that consent to sex is not consent to parenthood. And if the fetus (as a legal entity with legal rights) doesn't have consent to be inside a woman's body, she is allowed to remove it. Since biology is removed from the argument, the legal argument for a man to avoid becoming a father is essentially the same as the legal argument for a woman to avoid becoming a mother.