MINNEAPOLIS — Ashlie and John are the proud parents of two little girls.
John is a lawyer in private practice, while Ashlie is a lawyer and works for the state of Minnesota's judicial branch.
Last winter, baby No. 3 was on the way.
"We were ready for our baby to come," Ashlie said.
But at 31 weeks of pregnancy, Ashlie felt... off.
"I thought, 'I am probably overreacting. I have had two children before,'" she said.
But when they went in for a checkup, nothing could prepare them for what they were about to learn.
"It was probably within 15 minutes of being there, they told us our baby had died," Ashlie said.
"We found out her heart had stopped beating and our world just fell apart," John said.
Within hours of that, Ashlie would go into 72 hours of labor for a stillbirth.
"And you are in these in-between worlds of not wanting to be in labor for four days, but scared because at the end, you know your baby has died — and that's who you are about to meet," Ashlie said.
And meet her they did. They named her Blair.
Two weeks after the birth, they held her funeral. And one week after her funeral, Ashlie heard from her employer — the state of Minnesota.
They said it was time to come back to work, even though she already had approved parental leave.
"And what came from that conversation was them expressly saying I met all the qualifications, but the intent of the policy is for bonding," Ashlie said. "And because my baby died, that I was no longer bonding with her and no longer qualified under the policy."
Yes, she met all the qualifications, but the state said the policy also had an intent — and she didn't meet that intention.
"It feels like gaslighting because it doesn't make legal sense or rational sense," John said. "And if you wanted the intent in the policy, you should have put it there."
The language wasn't there during Ashlie and John's stillbirth, but it was changed recently to now say that leave can come for the employee who will care for and bond with their child during the leave.
Making it clear to them, that because of them, in their opinion, the policy was changed to exclude a stillbirth family.
"They had acknowledged that there was no one — this hadn't come up before. So if it hasn't come up before, and you have no evidence that something or someone is going to take advantage of it, it just seems punitive," said John.
When KARE 11 asked the Minnesota Judicial Branch about Ashlie and John's experience, we were told, "The Minnesota Judicial Branch is unable to respond because the information you seek is non-public data."
So Ashlie and John are sharing their story and now working to get a change at the legislative level.
"There is nothing that is going to change what happened to us, or there is no benefit we are going to receive, but that's not the point," said Ashlie. "The point is there will be more people this happens to and they deserve better than what we got."
Watch more Breaking The News:
Watch all of the latest stories from Breaking The News in our YouTube playlist: