This happened to someone at my wife's company. Had scheduled maternity leave, went into labor, lost the baby. Took a week off for grievance, which they paid her as sick time, and her scheduled 3 months maternity leave was cancelled. She didn't fight it, her husband didn't fight it, but many of the other pregnant woman in the office were angry for her. She could have taken the time off as sick time, but not as maternity leave, even if she'd wanted to. The other mothers want and think she and they should be eligible to take the time should they need it if such a tragedy happened to them. The woman who lost the baby just wanted to go on as normal but the other pregnant women wanted her to fight for her right and theirs to maternity leave even if the same thing happened.

In the end, they were all told to mind their own business and leave the poor woman alone, and everybody went back to work as normal, with the pregnant woman pissed. They all eventually gave birth, took their leaves, and came back, and it was awkward as shit for the one woman who'd lost her poor kid during childbirth.

The company gave that woman nothing, she asked for nothing, she just wanted to work and be allowed to grieve on her own terms. Now, in this case with Verizon, it seems she was better off not fighting, because she would have been fired. It's pretty ridiculous, I for one think if she needed the three months she should have taken it, or gotten it, but she didn't or maybe wouldn't have.

From what little I could find, any pregnancy after 24 weeks of maturity, if stillborn or miscarried, qualifies a woman for maternity leave in most cases. Any time less than 24 weeks is sick time. So she probably has a case, depends on the company policies?