The number of children a woman has is irrelevant to their position on Roe v. Wade. Not sure how many ways I have to say it for you to "get it." Acting Orthodox doesn't mean one is (as you've noted several times.)
I'll give you a real-life example. I have an Aunt who lives in Orchard Park, New York just outside of Buffalo, New York. She and her husband have 10 children. Yes, that's right: 10. Six boys, four girls. I can name them if you want. I'll start with her oldest, named Sheilah who's 27 now and her youngest Emily who's in sixth grade.
She's as pro-abortion as one can possibly be. Yes, she's Catholic. Insists on going to mass daily, chastises me every chance she gets for leaving the Catholic church decades ago (because of people exactly like her...) volunteers within the church, proclaims the Catholic church being the "one true church" and all their children went to Catholic school.
By your standard, she'd be an Orthodox Catholic and therefore pro-life because of how she "behaves" and yet, she's pro-abortion.
The Aunt I cite above exists, she's real, has 10 kids and I'm using her as an example simply to point out the flaw in your logic and conclusion to get you to re-think your position based on your statements. Nothing more, nothing less and I hope you take our discussion here in that spirit.
She explicitly criticized Roe v. Wade (see comment 27 above).
Those who are against Roe v. Wade often criticise it for not having exceptions for "life of the mother" while proclaiming themselves to be pro-life.
That of course is a ruse of an argument since the current state of modern medicine means that there is almost NEVER a case where an abortion is needed to protect the life of the mother.
Are there very specific, narrow cases where it is required? Perhaps. I'm not a doctor and wouldn't begin to know how to make a case for that. What I can say is overwhelmingly abortion today is used as a form of birth control and that my FR friend is as wrong as wrong can be.