Article
English, Spanish, French, Portuguese
ID: <
oai:doaj.org/article:6745880dc4f845c3b93e6e6afcf327d8>
·
DOI: <
10.11606/issn.2316-9044.v14i2p119-136>
Abstract
Considerando that judicial decisions still retain the ritualistic tradition of how to operate in the field of law centred on a legalistic and positivated view, the purpose of this article is to understand how judicial decisions affect the health care cotidy of a family who is suffering from the chronic condition by adrenoleucodystrophy. The methodological reference of Focal Life History was used using the Examination in Profundity, the narratives of which form the analytical corpus. It is noted that the actions of the judiciary are still ritualistic, conservative and piecemeal when it comes to responding to health needs, generating repeated searches when it comes to a person living a chronic condition of a degenerative nature requiring constant and progressively more intense care, such as the child of this study. In so doing, the judiciary strengthens the fragmented way in which health practices are carried out and does not constitute the principle of completeness. It follows that if the judiciary were to take care of the increased needs of the individual and the family, together with the rules governing the Single Health System, its intervention would be a positive element in contributing to public health policies, creating synergy with them and reducing, on a large scale, the movement of justice in health.