Litigio judicial y el derecho a la salud en Argentina

Gotlieb, Verónica; Yavich, Natalia; Báscolo, Ernesto

doi:10.1590/0102-311x00121114

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Brazil, lawsuits are also favourable in a percentage of 90.0% . By contrast, in Argentina, 75.0% of decisions were favourable, according to Gotlieb et al In Costa Rica, another study found 60.0% of favourable judgments…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicialization of the right to health: (Un)compliance of the judicial decisions in Medellin, Colombia

Gómez-Ceballos

Craveiro

Gonçalves

2019

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Introduction The judicialization of health arose following the possibility of judicially demanding the right to health before national and international courts. In the case of Colombia, health litigation is done through a constitutional tool called the tutela action, which allows for the immediate protection of fundamental rights. Methods A retrospective cross‐sectional study using a probabilistic stratified sample of 1031 users of the tutela actions, in Medellín, Colombia, between 2011 and 2014. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed, using statistical tests and multiple logistic regression models. Results According to the respondents, 95.9% of the tutela actions succeeded in favour of the applicant. On average, the judicial process took 10.96 days (SD = 8.09). After the favourable decision of the tutela action, access to health care followed in 76.2% of cases, partial access was found for 14.0% (median, 10 d), and in 9.8% of cases, claimants had not received access to the health care they sought. Conclusion The tutela action is an essential constitutional mechanism that guarantees the access to health services. However, it must be strengthened from the legal point of view through the implementation of monitoring and control actions and by imposing the sanctioning measures and deadlines established in existing legislation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicialization of the right to health: (Un)compliance of the judicial decisions in Medellin, Colombia

Gómez-Ceballos

Craveiro

Gonçalves

2019

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Peru, the final regulation mandates the health ministry build a list of rare diseases and their respective high-cost treatments, but stops short of describing reimbursement parameters. In Colombia and Argentina, litigation for access has been described as routine [40,41]. All three governments are focused on price control, centralized purchasing, and new medicine evaluation agencies to limit budget shock and to prioritize value.…”

Section: Perumentioning

confidence: 99%

A civil society view of rare disease public policy in six Latin American countries

Mayrides¹,

Castilla²,

Szelepski³

2020

Orphanet J Rare Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with rare diseases across the world struggle to access timely diagnosis and state-of-the-art treatment and management of their conditions. Several recently published reviews highlight the importance of country efforts to address rare diseases and orphan drugs policy comprehensively. However, many of these reviews lack depth and detail at the local level, which we believe is necessary for rare disease advocates to identify and prioritize opportunities for strengthening each country's policy framework. We asked leading patient advocates from civil society organizations their views on rare disease public policy in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru with a focus on whether specific laws and regulations in these six Latin American countries have been promulgated. From December 2018 to March 2019 we supplemented their perspectives with evidence from accessible literature using key search terms. For each country, we prepared a detailed analysis on how laws or other policy initiatives took shape and the steps taken since to implement them. This allowed us to identify five broad policy categories for subsequent analysis: national laws, national regulations, health system incorporation of rare disease treatments, care delivery, and patient engagement. By describing the different approaches, challenges and timelines across six countries, our research demonstrates that strengthening rare disease policy first requires a common understanding and local consensus of each country's recent past and current situation. Subsequent analysis based on a set of common policy dimensions led us to where we believe salient opportunities lie for each of these countries to strengthen their overall policy framework for rare disease patients.

show abstract

“…La judicialización se ha limitado a operar como un mecanismo de protección de los derechos individuales, pero sin verdadera incidencia en las políticas públicas de salud. Y así, mientras el litigio por acceso a la atención de la salud mantenga su actual patrón individualista, difícilmente podrá desarrollar todo su potencial para garantizar el efectivo respeto por el derecho a la salud 32 .…”

Section: La Objeción De La Litigación Como Elemento Principal De Junclassified

Fundamentalidad del derecho a la protección de la salud y sostenibilidad del sistema público de salud (cuando más puede ser menos)

Jääskeläinen¹

2019

TYRC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

En el reciente debate sobre la reforma de la regulación de los derechos sociales en la Constitución y el ascenso de algunos de ellos a la categoría de derechos fundamentales, el derecho a la protección de la salud cobra un gran protagonismo. La propuesta de transformar en derecho fundamental al derecho a la protección de la salud, si bien pudiera tener efectos positivos desde la perspectiva del aseguramiento de las condiciones mínimas para el ejercicio de la libertad, también presenta problemas en atención al poder económico que caería en manos de los Tribunales y al incremento de la litigación de provocaría tal reforma. Por otro lado, nuestro sistema constitucional tiene suficientes instrumentos legales para garantizar ese derecho social sin la necesidad de transformarlo en un derecho fundamental.In the recent debate on the reform of the regulation of social rights in the Constitution and the rise of some of them to the category of fundamental rights, the right to healthcare takes on a prominent position. The proposal to transform the right to healthcare into a fundamental right, although it could have positive effects from the perspective of ensuring the minimum conditions for the exercise of freedom, also presents problems related to the economic power that the proposal would give to the Court and to the increase of litigation that it would cause. On the other hand, our constitutional system has enough legal instruments to guarantee such social right without the need of transforming it into a fundamental right.

show abstract

Litigio judicial y el derecho a la salud en Argentina

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Judicialization of the right to health: (Un)compliance of the judicial decisions in Medellin, Colombia

Judicialization of the right to health: (Un)compliance of the judicial decisions in Medellin, Colombia

A civil society view of rare disease public policy in six Latin American countries

Fundamentalidad del derecho a la protección de la salud y sostenibilidad del sistema público de salud (cuando más puede ser menos)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About