Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2018 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Coelho, Péricles
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Gomide, Paula Inez Cunha |
| Banca de defesa: |
Rabello Filho, Francisco Pinto,
Ormeno, Gabriela Izabel Reyes,
Fruet, Gustavo Bonato |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Tuiuti do Parana
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Mestrado em Psicologia
|
| Departamento: |
Psicologia
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Resumo em Inglês: |
The general purpose of this paper is to discuss different concepts of moral harassment, based on Psychology and Law, and to analyze the vision of the Courts regarding the moral harassment between student and professor. The concepts offered by both sciences, in spite of their peculiarities, are connected and complementary to each other. The Psychology emphasizes the psychological violence caused by humiliation and embarrassments, with impact on interpersonal relations and repercussions on physical and mental health, unleashed by constant acts and often stuffed by subtleties. The Brazilian Law, in spite of its silence on a specific indemnity over moral harassment, lays down on the article 927 of the Civil Code that each and every illicit damage will be object of full indemnity by its responsible. Besides that, in order to distinguish moral harassment and isolated illicit acts, and, yet, of acts of danger (illicit act that causes harm), characteristics of such institutes are specified and clarified. The data were obtained through public consultation to the websites of the states Courts of Justice, where 2.661 decisions were found, from which 33 were selected, using as criterion of inclusion the relationship between student and professor in the higher education scope. As a criterion of exclusion, subjects strange to the center of this research were used, such as: non-attendance of the students, elementary school and high school, mistakes when attributing grades on the internet system, harming the student, request for document expedition, inability to graduate from failing a subject, sexual harassment in elementary and high school, labor relationship (public server or from the private initiative), and consumption relationship 33 decisions were analyzed andit was found that, on first degree of jurisdiction, 23 (70%) were judged fully unfounded, for not being considered illicit acts, under the perspective of the law. From the 23, just 3 (7,6%) were proposed by professors. While, on second degree of jurisdiction, from the 33 decisions, 31 (95,5%) kept the decision of the ones judged unfounded. Out of the 2 (4,5%) revised decisions, one was proposed by a professor and the other by a student. The main reasons alleged for moral harassment were insults in the classroom (60,60%) and attacks on honor (36,36%), from which 30% of the authors are from Law School. |
| Link de acesso: |
http://tede.utp.br:8080/jspui/handle/tede/1571
|
Resumo: |
The general purpose of this paper is to discuss different concepts of moral harassment, based on Psychology and Law, and to analyze the vision of the Courts regarding the moral harassment between student and professor. The concepts offered by both sciences, in spite of their peculiarities, are connected and complementary to each other. The Psychology emphasizes the psychological violence caused by humiliation and embarrassments, with impact on interpersonal relations and repercussions on physical and mental health, unleashed by constant acts and often stuffed by subtleties. The Brazilian Law, in spite of its silence on a specific indemnity over moral harassment, lays down on the article 927 of the Civil Code that each and every illicit damage will be object of full indemnity by its responsible. Besides that, in order to distinguish moral harassment and isolated illicit acts, and, yet, of acts of danger (illicit act that causes harm), characteristics of such institutes are specified and clarified. The data were obtained through public consultation to the websites of the states Courts of Justice, where 2.661 decisions were found, from which 33 were selected, using as criterion of inclusion the relationship between student and professor in the higher education scope. As a criterion of exclusion, subjects strange to the center of this research were used, such as: non-attendance of the students, elementary school and high school, mistakes when attributing grades on the internet system, harming the student, request for document expedition, inability to graduate from failing a subject, sexual harassment in elementary and high school, labor relationship (public server or from the private initiative), and consumption relationship 33 decisions were analyzed andit was found that, on first degree of jurisdiction, 23 (70%) were judged fully unfounded, for not being considered illicit acts, under the perspective of the law. From the 23, just 3 (7,6%) were proposed by professors. While, on second degree of jurisdiction, from the 33 decisions, 31 (95,5%) kept the decision of the ones judged unfounded. Out of the 2 (4,5%) revised decisions, one was proposed by a professor and the other by a student. The main reasons alleged for moral harassment were insults in the classroom (60,60%) and attacks on honor (36,36%), from which 30% of the authors are from Law School. |
