Yes, there is middle ground for these policies, but it wasn't acceptable to people on the right. Safe, regulated abortion on demand for any reason at any point prior to labor is the farthest left; no abortion access even in the event of miscarriages, rape, or incest is the furthest right. We had safe, regulated abortions almost on demand until the end of the second trimester. That was the middle ground and conservatives pushed and pushed to either completely remove access through nonessential bureaucratic hurdles such as how Texas passed a law in 2013 that all abortion clinics have admitting privileges at local hospitals and all hallways and doors in the center had to be wide enough to wheel gurneys through in the event of an emergency - ostensibly solutions in search of a problem, just to shut down the large majority of abortion providers - or have engaged in a decades long push to manipulate the right type of Manchurian president into attacking the Supreme Court into overturning Roe v Wade.
In the years following that 2013 law, Texas dropped from 41 abortion centers to 10. The law was overturned in 2016, but the damage had been done. Leases for centers had changed terms, funding streams dried up, staff had scattered to the winds... If what we already had in place wasn't an acceptable middle ground, then we as a country would have been able to codify Roe v Wade.
To put it a different way: I'm not saying there is no middle ground. They have said there is no middle ground. To use your own words, it's disingenuous to act as though both sides are being intractable in the policymaking process.