[Right to health litigations: a discussion on the observance of the principles of Brazil's Health System].
The paper reflects upon the legal interpretations of the right to health and its consequences. In order to exemplify the complexity of the theme and its emotional appeal, it analyzes the Supreme Court's decision in a public litigation against the State of Alagoas demanding that medication be supplied. Different interpretations, by both judges and health professionals, of the notion of integral health care, one of the principles of Brazil's Health System, are examined. It is held that scarcity of resources must be taken into consideration when drawing up public policies that aim to allocate funding efficiently and in a manner that is compatible with the principals of the health system. Finally, the impact of judicial decisions concerning medication not offered by the system and the behavior of the Brazilian judiciary with this respect are discussed.
Vieira
Fabiola Sulpino
FS
Area de Economia da Saúde e Desenvolvimento, Secretaria Executiva, Ministério da Saúde, Brasília, DF, Brazil. fabiolasulpino@uol.com.br
D001938:Brazil; D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000458:organization & administration*; D018954:Drugs, Essential / Q000600:supply & distribution*; D033161:Government Regulation; D006297:Health Services Accessibility / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D033222:Judicial Role; D028701:Patient Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*
D018954:Drugs, Essential