Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Melo, Luíza Viana
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Pinto, Luciana Moraes Raso Sardinha
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Haikal, Daniela Mello Coelho
,
Dias, Maria Tereza Fonseca
|
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Fundação João Pinheiro
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Mestrado em Administração Pública
|
| Departamento: |
Escola de Governo Professor Paulo Neves de Carvalho
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://repositorio.fjp.mg.gov.br/handle/tede/408
|
Resumo: |
Twenty-nine years after the promulgation of the Constitution of the Republic of 1988, it is necessary to rethink many institutes and innovations brought or improved by the Major Law, especially regarding the syndicability of the fundamental right to health and the suitable guardianship to protect and to realize this right, in view of the current scenario of indiscriminate health judicialization. In this sense, the present study considers that the inadequate management of collective guardianship in the scope of health judicialization, in which the Prosecutor's Office favors a health approach based on its individual bias, associated with standardized decisions that do not promote a compatible procedural instruction with the complexity of lawsuits, are factors that end up aggravating a framework of inequalities in access to this right. Therefore, the collective health dimension and the SUS (Unified Health System) have been deprecated in the current judicialization of health, despite the experience of a paradigm of Constitutional State of Law, marked by the publicity of Law and by the force of fundamental social and collective rights. |
