" 

 ==POV dispute== 
  has set about replacing many technical terms with colloquialisms and non-technical terms, namely, the word ""woman"" they replaced with ""mother"" (to refer to a pregnant woman), the words ""woman"" and ""man"" with ""father"" and ""mother"" (in a sentence that discussed infertility, indicating that the people are neither pregnant nor parents), the word ""uterus"" with ""womb"", and the word ""fetus"" they replaced with ""baby"" and the phrase ""unborn child"".  I am starting to see this as POV-pushing.   
 Editors at the Abortion articles appear to have reached a general consensus that referring to a fetus as a ""baby"" or ""unborn child"" is inappropriate, and that referring to a pregnant woman as a ""mother"" is inappropriate.  While the pregnancy article does not focus on abortion, it necessarily does not only refer to pregnant women who intend to carry their pregnancies to term.  The article also describes the state of pregnant women who either will or must abort, or who will miscarry.  Furthermore, there is nothing inaccurate or questionable about calling a fetus and a pregnant woman by those terms, they carry no POV at all, whereas Ferrylodge's terms do.  
 Exceptions: I do think that in the section about prenatal nutrition that the phrase ""expecting mother"" would be fine, and that, of course, the word ""mother"" and ""baby"" are appropriate when describing situations where childbirth is completed.  Thoughts?   "