A JUDICIALIZAÇÃO DO DIREITO À SAÚDE: ANÁLISE DOS REQUISITOS PARA CONCESSÃO DE LIMINARES

This study focuses on the analysis of the judicialization of the right to health, emphasizing the legal and practical implications arising from the granting of injunctions within the public health domain. The right to health, enshrined in the 1988 Federal Constitution as a fundamental social right, guarantees all citizens universal and equitable access to health services, a direct outcome of the Sanitary Reform that culminated in the establishment of the Unified Health System (SUS). The analysis was conducted through a review of literature, legislation, jurisprudence, and academic works about the theme, highlighting the consequences of this judicial intervention, which include significant financial impacts, an increase in inequalities regarding access to health services, and an overburdened judiciary. Subsequently, the phenomenon of judicialization of the right to health, intensified over the past few decades, is discussed considering its implications and consequences. This right has increasingly become the subject of judicial scrutiny, prompting interventions by the judiciary to ensure access to treatments, medications, and procedures. The consequences of judicialization to the right to health are multifaceted and include substantial financial impacts on the public budget. While judicialization seeks to ensure the effectiveness of the right to health and to fully protect citizens, its effects can be detrimental to the equilibrium of public health policies, affecting both equity and the sustainability of the system. As a result of this work, it is indicated that, to mitigate negative impacts, it is essential for judicial decisions to be made based on rigorous technical criteria and to be supported by robust evidence, such as medical reports. Furthermore, the responsibility for the implementation of judicial decisions should be tripartite, involving the Federal Government, States, and Municipalities, with procedural efficiency being necessary to prevent harm to citizens' health, thereby safeguarding the sustainability of the Unified Health System (SUS).

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Revista fisio&terapia.
Published
2024-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.69849/revistaft/ni10202410261623
Primary Topic
Public Health in Brazil
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A JUDICIALIZAÇÃO DO DIREITO À SAÚDE: ANÁLISE DOS REQUISITOS PARA CONCESSÃO DE LIMINARES

Gleiderson Magalhães da Silva
Revista fisio&terapia.
Public Health in Brazil
article

A JUDICIALIZAÇÃO DO DIREITO À SAÚDE: ANÁLISE DOS REQUISITOS PARA CONCESSÃO DE LIMINARES

Gleiderson Magalhães da Silva
article en

Abstract

This study focuses on the analysis of the judicialization of the right to health, emphasizing the legal and practical implications arising from the granting of injunctions within the public health domain. The right to health, enshrined in the 1988 Federal Constitution as a fundamental social right, guarantees all citizens universal and equitable access to health services, a direct outcome of the Sanitary Reform that culminated in the establishment of the Unified Health System (SUS). The analysis was conducted through a review of literature, legislation, jurisprudence, and academic works about the theme, highlighting the consequences of this judicial intervention, which include significant financial impacts, an increase in inequalities regarding access to health services, and an overburdened judiciary. Subsequently, the phenomenon of judicialization of the right to health, intensified over the past few decades, is discussed considering its implications and consequences. This right has increasingly become the subject of judicial scrutiny, prompting interventions by the judiciary to ensure access to treatments, medications, and procedures. The consequences of judicialization to the right to health are multifaceted and include substantial financial impacts on the public budget. While judicialization seeks to ensure the effectiveness of the right to health and to fully protect citizens, its effects can be detrimental to the equilibrium of public health policies, affecting both equity and the sustainability of the system. As a result of this work, it is indicated that, to mitigate negative impacts, it is essential for judicial decisions to be made based on rigorous technical criteria and to be supported by robust evidence, such as medical reports. Furthermore, the responsibility for the implementation of judicial decisions should be tripartite, involving the Federal Government, States, and Municipalities, with procedural efficiency being necessary to prevent harm to citizens' health, thereby safeguarding the sustainability of the Unified Health System (SUS).

Revista fisio&terapia.
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Public Health in Brazil
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.