Acesso à saúde, igualdade e o STF: um estudo sobre a ADI 5543/DF
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2022-06
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Santos, Carlos Henrique Ferreira
Orientador
Loschiavo, Marco Antonio
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O principal objetivo deste trabalho é apresentar as divergências referentes aos
argumentos da Administração Pública para restringir a doação de sangue por homens
homossexuais, por meio do art. 25, inciso XXX, alínea "d", da Resolução n° 34/2014, da
ANVISA, e art. 64, inciso IV, da Portaria n° 158/2016, do Ministério da Saúde, em face aos
direitos violados, através da análise da Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade 5543/DF e da
decisão proferida pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal. Para esse fim, foi utilizada a metodologia
descritiva, tendo sido realizado um estudo de caso sobre a ação, como também pesquisas em
doutrinas, artigos e noticiários. Analisada a defesa em prol do Poder Público, que intentou
proteger a saúde pública limitando a doação para os indivíduos enquadrados no conceito de
grupo de risco, que incluía os homossexuais, bem como os motivos que fundamentaram o
pedido de inconstitucionalidade dessas normas, atacando a razoabilidade e a proporcionalidade
da medida. E, considerando-se a afronta aos princípios da igualdade, da dignidade humana,
tem-se que a expurgação das normas eram de rigor para que o Estado reafirmasse o seu
compromisso com os direitos humanos e com a concretização das normas constitucionais.
The main objective of this study is to present the divergences referents to the arguments of the Public Administration to restrict the blood donation by homossexuals, through the edition of the art. 25, XXX, subparagraph “d”, of the Resolution n° 34/2014, of ANVISA, and the art. 64, IV, of the Portaria n° 158/2016, of the Ministry of Health, in face of the rights that were violated, through the ADI 5543/DF analysis and the decision uttered by the Supreme Court. For this purpose, was utilized the descriptive methodology, and was made an study of case and researches in doctrine, articles and news. Once analyzed the defeat of the State, that tried to protect the public health limiting the donation by the ones considered in the concept of group of risk, which included the homossexuals, as well as the motives that substantiated the requirement for the unconstitucionality declaration of these rules, attacking the reasonableness and proportionality. And, considering the violation of equality and the dignity of the human person principles, concludes that the expurgation of these norms was necessary for the State reaffirm it’s compromisse with the human rights and the concretion of the constitucional rules.
The main objective of this study is to present the divergences referents to the arguments of the Public Administration to restrict the blood donation by homossexuals, through the edition of the art. 25, XXX, subparagraph “d”, of the Resolution n° 34/2014, of ANVISA, and the art. 64, IV, of the Portaria n° 158/2016, of the Ministry of Health, in face of the rights that were violated, through the ADI 5543/DF analysis and the decision uttered by the Supreme Court. For this purpose, was utilized the descriptive methodology, and was made an study of case and researches in doctrine, articles and news. Once analyzed the defeat of the State, that tried to protect the public health limiting the donation by the ones considered in the concept of group of risk, which included the homossexuals, as well as the motives that substantiated the requirement for the unconstitucionality declaration of these rules, attacking the reasonableness and proportionality. And, considering the violation of equality and the dignity of the human person principles, concludes that the expurgation of these norms was necessary for the State reaffirm it’s compromisse with the human rights and the concretion of the constitucional rules.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
neoconstitucionalismo , igualdade , discriminação , direitos humanos , neoconstitucionalism , equality , discrimination , human-rights