The international right to health: What does it mean in legal practice and how can it affect priority setting for universal health coverage?

Health Systems and Reform

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 23-31

  Dittrich, Rebecca ^a,b   Cubillos, Leonardo ^c   Gostin, Lawrence ^a   Chalkidou, Kalipso ^d   Li, Ryan ^d  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Health technology assessment; Judicialization of right to health; Priority setting; Rational priority setting; Right to health; Universal health coverage

Indexed keywords

EID: 84975315173     PISSN: 23288604     EISSN: 23288620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/23288604.2016.1124167     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Klein R, Maybin J. Thinking about rationing. UK: The King’s Fund; 2012. Available at http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/field/field_publication_file/Thinking-about-rationing-the-kings-fund-may-2012.pdf (accessed 27 September 2015)
2. Glassman A, Chalkidou K. Priority-setting in health: building institutions for smarter public spending. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development; 2012. Available at http://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/1426240_file_priority_setting_ global_health_FINAL_0.pdf (accessed 27 September 2015)
3. Li R, Hernandez-Villafuerte K, Towse A, Vlad I, Chalkidou K. Mapping priority-setting in health in 17 countries across Asia, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. Health Sys Ref, this issue.
4. Hogerzeil HV, Samson M, Casanovas JV, Rahmani-Ocara L. Is access to essential medicines as part of the fulfillment of the right to health enforceable through the courts? Lancet 2006; 368(9532): 305-311.
5. Biehl J, Amon JJ, Socal MP, Petryna A. Between the court and the clinic: lawsuits for medicines and the right to health in Brazil. Health Hum Rights 2012; 14(1): 36-52.
6. Cubillos L, Escobar M-L, Pavlovic S, Iunes R. Universal health coverage and litigation in Latin America. J Health Organ Manag 2012; 26(3): 390-406.
7. Yamin AE. The right to health under international law and its relevance to the United States. Am J Public Health 2005; 95 (7): 1156-1161.
8. United Nations. The universal declaration of human rights. Available at http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/(accessed 5 September 2015)
9. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. International covenant on economic, social, and cultural rights. Available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx (accessed 1 September 2015)
10. UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. General comment no. 14: the right to the highest attainable standard of health (Art. 12 of the Covenant). August 2000. Available athttp://www.refworld.org/docid/4538838d0.html(accessed 10 September 2015)
11. World Health Organization. Constitution of the World Health Organization. 2006. Available at http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf (accessed 1 September 2015)
12. Heymann J, Cassola A, Raub A, Mishra L. Constitutional rights to health, public health and medical care: the status of health protections in 191 countries. Glob Public Health 2013; 8(6): 639-653.
13. Brazil’s constitution of 1988 with amendments through 2014, Rosenn KS, trans. n.d. Available at https://www.con stituteproject.org/constitution/Brazil_2014.pdf (accessed 28 September 2015)
14. Haiti 1987 (rev. 2012), del Carmen Gress M, Ruchti JJ, trans. 2012. Available at https://www.constituteproject.org/constitu tion/Haiti_2012?lang=en (accessed 20 September 2015)
15. Constitutional Court. Ms. Vera Salazar Navarro v. Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, 01-0090007-CO Sept. 26, 2001 (Costa Rica).
16. Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nacion (National Supreme Court of Justice). Orlando, Susana Beatriz c/ Buenos Aires, Provincia de y otros s/ amparo. O.59.XXXVIII 2005 (Arg.).
17. Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Naci on (National Supreme Court of Justice). Campodonico de Beviacqua, Ana Carina c/ Ministerio de Salud y Accion Social-Secretarıa de Programas de Salud y Banco de Drogas Neoplasicas. C.823.XXXV Oct. 24, 2000 (Arg.).
18. Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice. Gila Lou-zon v. Government of Israel, HCJ 4013/05 Aug. 8, 2005 (Israel).
19. La Sala Segunda de Revision de la Corte Constitucional [Second Review Chamber of the Colombian Constitutional Court]. Sentencia T-760 del 2008 [Judgement T-760 of 2008] July 31, 2008 (Col.).
20. Yamin AE, Gloppen S, eds. Litigating health rights. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2011.
21. Scheunemann LP, White DB. The ethics and reality of rationing in medicine. Chest 2011; 140(6): 1625-1632.
22. Krubiner CR, Faden RR. How to consider ethics and equity when designing a health benefits plan. In: What services should health systems provide? Health benefits in low-and middle-income countries, Giedion U, Glassman A, Smith PC, eds. Forthcoming.
23. Clarke S, Weale A. Social values in health priority setting: a conceptual framework. J Health Organ Manag 2012; 26(3): 293-316.
24. Ferraz OLM. The right to health in the courts of Brazil: worsening health inequities? Health Hum Rights 2009; 11(2): 33-45.
25. Civil Appeals Court, 2nd District. Marquez Velazquez Antonio Gerardo v. Ministry of Public Health, 39/10. March 10, 2010 (Uruguay).
26. Norheim OF, Wilson BM. Health rights litigation and access to medicines: priority classification of successful cases from Costa Rica’s Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court. Health Hum Rights J 2014; 16(2): 47-61.
27. Wang DWL. Can litigation promote fairness in healthcare? The judicial review of rationing decisions in Brazil and England [dissertation]. London: London School of Economics; 2013.
28. Tribunal de Apelaciones en lo Civil de Cuarto Turno [Civil Appeals Court, 4th District]. Hernandez Gonzales, Eliu Aquiliano c/ Estado-Poder Ejecutivo-M.S.P. –Accion de Amparo [Hernandez Gonzalez, Eliu Aquiliano vs. Executive State Power of the Ministry of Public Health –writ of amparo 179/ 11 June 7, 2011 (Uruguay).
29. Ventura M, Simas L, Pepe VLE, Schramm FR. Judicializaçao da saude, acesso a justiça e a efetividade do direito a saude [Judicialization of the right to health, access to justice and the effectiveness of right to health]. Revista de Saude Coletiva 2010; 20(1): 77-100.
30. Afonso da Silva V, Terrazas FV. Claiming the right to health in Brazilian courts: the exclusion of the already excluded? Law Soc Inq 2011; 36(4): 825-853.
31. Lopes LC, Barberato-Filho S, Costa AC, Osorio-de-Castro CGS. Rational use of anticancer drugs and patient lawsuits in the state of Sao Paulo, Southeastern Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 2010; 44(4): 1-9.
32. Machado MAA, Acurcio FA, Brandao CMR, Faleiros DR, Guerra AA Jr, Cherchiglia ML, Andrade EIG. Judicialization of access to medicines in Minas Gerais state, Southeastern Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 2011; 45(3): 1-7.
33. Tribunal de Apelaciones en lo Civil de Segundo Turno [Sec-ond Chamber of the Civil Court of Appeals]. Hernandez Edward c/ Fondo Nacional de Recursos Accion de Amparo. [Hernandez Edward v. Fondo Nacional de Recursos (National Monetary Fund) Protection Action 393/2011 Dec. 21, 2011 (Uruguay).
34. Constitutional Court of South Africa. Minister of Health v. Treatment Action Campaign (No 2) [2002] ZACC 15 July 5, 2002 (South Africa).
35. Constitutional Court. Mr. X v. Instituto de Seguros Sociales (ISS) T-271 June 23, 1995 (Col.).
36. Supremo Tribunal Federal (Federal Supreme Court). State of Mato Grosso v. Marina de Almeida Andrade RE 400040/MT 2005 (Brazil).
37. Central Administrative Court. The case of administrative organization issuing unlawful regulation, AA (alias) versus Ministry of Finance 502/2558 February, 26 2015 (Thailand).
38. Torres JB, Stuwe L. Memorias. Segundo Encuentro Regional Sobre Derecho a La Salud y Sistemas de Salud [Minutes of the Second Latin American Symposium on the Right to Health and Health Systems]. December 2011. Available at http://api.ning.com/files/R2K4gXWu4ReSrJzT9I*L2JGvpb-mFa2Z*eOg1GeEZv3onN3W5AjT6UoXh8F9evOHlGC87xVQ HYaMzeMZJ1rVg2dxHow6m/MemoriasdelSegundoEncuentroR egionalsobreDerechoalaSaludySistemasdeSalud.pdf (accessed 2 November 2015)
39. Daniels N, Charvel S, Gelpi AH, Portney T, Urrutia J. Role of the courts in the progressive realization of the right to health: between the threat and the promise of judicialization in Mexico. Health Systems & Reform 2015; 1(3): 229-234.
40. Mexican Supreme Court. Amparo en Revision 350/2014, Segunda Sala de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nacion [Motion for review in the Amparo trial, case 350/2014/] Sept. 17, 2014 (Mex.).
41. Chalkidou K, Marten R, Cutler D, Culyer T, Smith R, Teerawattananon Y, Cluzeau F, Li R, Sullivan R, Huang Y, et al. Health technology assessment in universal health coverage. Lancet 2013; 382(9910): e48-e49.
42. World Health Organization. Health technology assessment. n.d. Available at http://www.who.int/medical_devices/assess ment/en/(accessed 27 October 2015)
43. Wilsdon T, Fiz E, Haderi A. A comparative analysis of the role and impact of health technology assessment: 2013. 2014. Available at http://www.efpia.eu/uploads/documents/cra-com parative-analysis.pdf (accessed 10 September 2015)
44. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Technology appraisal and highly specialised technologies appeals. n.d. Available at https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/nice-technology-appraisal-guidance/technology-appraisal-and-highly-specialised-tech nologies-appeals (accessed 1 September 2015)
45. High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division Administrative Court. Eisai Limited and The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Alzheimer’s Society and Shire Pharmaceutical Limited CO/85/2007 Aug. 10, 2007 (Eng.).
46. Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ 2000; 321 (7272): 1300-1301.
47. Rid A. Justice and procedure: how does “accountability for reasonableness” result in fair limit-setting decisions? J Med Ethics 2009; 35(1): 12-16.
48. Rawlins MD, Cuyler AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 2004; 329(7459): 224-227.
49. Tantivess S, Velasco PR, Yothasamut J, Mohara A, Lim-prayoonyong H, Teerawattananon Y. Efficiency or equity: value judgments in coverage decisions in Thailand. J Health Organ Manag 2012; 26(3): 331-342.
50. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance (3rd ed.). 2012. Available at https://www.nice.org.uk/article/pmg4/chap ter/3-determining-the-evidence-for-review-and-consideration (accessed 24 October 2015)
51. Court of Appeal, Civil Division. R (on the application of Rog-ers) v. Swindon NHS Primary Care Trust and Another [2006] EWCA Civ 392 April 12, 2006 (Eng.).