This Note discusses the Family and Medical Leave Act and different courts’ interpretation of the testimonial requirements of the FMLA. This Note also suggests changes to the corresponding DOL regulations to ensure a consistent and fair implementation of the FMLA that adheres to Congress’s intent when passing the FMLA. Part I gives an overview of the FMLA. Part II discusses the different positions that courts have taken regarding what type of testimony will be allowed to prove a “serious health condition.” Part III argues that the ambiguity of the DOL regulations has caused inconsistent court rulings. Part IV argues that the DOL regulations should be changed to clearly state what type of testimony is required to prove a “serious health condition” existed and suggests changes to make lay testimony sufficient to create a genuine issue of fact, subject to the exceptions outlined above.