Judicialization of Health: arguments used in the lawsuits against the SUS, in the Court of Justice of the Federal District and Territories, by the procedural actors

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the speeches of the procedural actors in lawsuits in the Court of Justice of the Federal District and Territories in which they prosecute actions in detriment of the public health policies, in the period between 2012 and 2013, in order to know the arguments most commonly used for the judgment of these actions. Methodology: A descriptive, analytical, documentary and bibliographic research was carried out using secondary data. The data were collected through a research on judicialization in Brazil in the years of 2012 and 2013. The quantitative data available were already treated in tables and graphs and the qualitative data were made available without due treatment, which was done from the method of Idiosyncratic Analysis. Results: The three actors analyzed author, defendant and judge, deal with logical issues that occur in the system and that discrepancies may occur. Each author has his or her points of view and experience and their particularities that should not be discarded, so that there may be visible conflicts, but if it comes to health, the common ground, is the best decision for the user. The requests to be judicialized do not directly correspond to the diseases that most affect the patients. Conclusion: It is possible to gauge from the discourses the imprudence with the patients that are in the process and it is perceived that many of the services rendered are still in deficit with their care, being that the Brazilian state is not yet universal guarantor of the users in your needs.