O princípio da dignidade humana e da proteção à saúde são decorrentes do direito fundamental à vida. São direitos definidos como prerrogativas mínimas sem as quais o cidadão não existiria dentro do estado democrático de Direito. O pluralismo e os tempos modernos evidenciam outros problemas para a humanidade e, dentre eles, está a obesidade. Trata-se de problema que decorre de um processo histórico, expondo que a alimentação humana mudou substancialmente com a crescente urbanização, somada ao fenômeno da globalização e a disseminação da cultura de consumo, fatores que foram predominantes para o aumento exponencial desta doença. Atualmente é problema grave de saúde pública mundial, que dependendo do país e de acordo com seu desenvolvimento, pode chegar a ser causa de discriminação social, vulnerabilidade e exclusão social. Nesse aspecto, na mesma medida em que a obesidade é crescente em todo mundo, as diversas formas de sanar tal questão também são presentes. Logo, evidencia-se naturalmente constatação do crescimento das chamadas cirurgias bariátricas e, como consequência óbvia de tal aumento, a possibilidade de erros médicos em tais intervenções também é cada vez mais crescente. A medicina é atividade que pela sua própria natureza envolve riscos e lida com o bem mais essencial e fundamental. Assim, o erro médico não pode ser apenado com benevolência. Quaisquer ofensas a tais direitos são repelidas pelo Poder Judiciário que, por meio do instituto da responsabilidade civil, evidencia as premissas básicas de prudência, perícia e diligência, expondo a necessidade de atitudes regulares dos profissionais ligados à atividade médica e o bom senso na apuração de eventual ilícito, bem com condenações justas e igualitárias, pautadas na análise técnica e específica a respeito da conduta do profissional, após a observância de todos os princípios éticolegais e processuais. Assim, neste trabalho busca-se apresentar a tutela jurisdicional da cirurgia bariátrica no que diz respeito a responsabilização do médico por erro, aplicando-se a teoria da responsabilização civil e apontando-se a natureza e a ocorrência dos erros que potencializam e embasam demandas judiciais, bem como os procedimentos regulares e recomendados com o objeto de prevenir a responsabilização. / The principles of human dignity and health protection are derived from the fundamental right to life. They are rights defined as the minimum prerogatives without which citizens could not exist within a democratic state. Pluralism and the modern times point to other issues for mankind, among them, obesity. This is a problem that derives from a historical process, evidenced by changes in human nutrition due to the ever-growing trend of urbanization, in addition to the phenomenon of globalization and we spread culture of consumption, which have been major factors for the exponential growth of this disease. In the present day it presents itself as a serious global public healthcare issue, and depending on which country and stage of development, may become the cause of vulnerability, social prejudice and exclusion. Meanwhile obesity has been shown to be growing worldwide, various means of addressing and solving this matter have also been made available. It may be verified a growth in the number of the so-called bariatric surgeries, and as a direct outcome, the enhanced possibility of medical failure during these procedures. The practice of medicine inherently involves risks while dealing with one´s most fundamental and essential belonging. Hence, medical failure cannot be taken lightly or benevolently. Any offenses to such rights are rebuked by the Judiciary, that bring forth the basic assumptions of prudence, skill and diligence through the institution of civil responsibility, pointing to the need for regular attitudes of medical-related professionals and proper reasoning when examining possible illicit, as well as fair and equal conviction, based on the specific technical analysis regarding the professional´s conduct, whilst observing all procedural, ethical and legal principles. Therefore, this publication intends to present the jurisdictional tutelage of bariatric surgery concerning the physicians accountability for his or her mistake by applying the theory of civil accountability, identifying the nature and occurrence of the errors that provoke or lay grounds for legal action, as well as the regular procedures advised in order to prevent accountability.

O princípio da dignidade humana e da proteção à saúde são decorrentes do direito fundamental à vida. São direitos definidos como prerrogativas mínimas sem as quais o cidadão não existiria dentro do estado democrático de Direito. O pluralismo e os tempos modernos evidenciam outros problemas para a humanidade e, dentre eles, está a obesidade. Trata-se de problema que decorre de um processo histórico, expondo que a alimentação humana mudou substancialmente com a crescente urbanização, somada ao fenômeno da globalização e a disseminação da cultura de consumo, fatores que foram predominantes para o aumento exponencial desta doença. Atualmente é problema grave de saúde pública mundial, que dependendo do país e de acordo com seu desenvolvimento, pode chegar a ser causa de discriminação social, vulnerabilidade e exclusão social. Nesse aspecto, na mesma medida em que a obesidade é crescente em todo mundo, as diversas formas de sanar tal questão também são presentes. Logo, evidencia-se naturalmente constatação do crescimento das chamadas cirurgias bariátricas e, como consequência óbvia de tal aumento, a possibilidade de erros médicos em tais intervenções também é cada vez mais crescente. A medicina é atividade que pela sua própria natureza envolve riscos e lida com o bem mais essencial e fundamental. Assim, o erro médico não pode ser apenado com benevolência. Quaisquer ofensas a tais direitos são repelidas pelo Poder Judiciário que, por meio do instituto da responsabilidade civil, evidencia as premissas básicas de prudência, perícia e diligência, expondo a necessidade de atitudes regulares dos profissionais ligados à atividade médica e o bom senso na apuração de eventual ilícito, bem com condenações justas e igualitárias, pautadas na análise técnica e específica a respeito da conduta do profissional, após a observância de todos os princípios éticolegais e processuais. Assim, neste trabalho busca-se apresentar a tutela jurisdicional da cirurgia bariátrica no que diz respeito a responsabilização do médico por erro, aplicando-se a teoria da responsabilização civil e apontando-se a natureza e a ocorrência dos erros que potencializam e embasam demandas judiciais, bem como os procedimentos regulares e recomendados com o objeto de prevenir a responsabilização. / The principles of human dignity and health protection are derived from the fundamental right to life. They are rights defined as the minimum prerogatives without which citizens could not exist within a democratic state. Pluralism and the modern times point to other issues for mankind, among them, obesity. This is a problem that derives from a historical process, evidenced by changes in human nutrition due to the ever-growing trend of urbanization, in addition to the phenomenon of globalization and we spread culture of consumption, which have been major factors for the exponential growth of this disease. In the present day it presents itself as a serious global public healthcare issue, and depending on which country and stage of development, may become the cause of vulnerability, social prejudice and exclusion. Meanwhile obesity has been shown to be growing worldwide, various means of addressing and solving this matter have also been made available. It may be verified a growth in the number of the so-called bariatric surgeries, and as a direct outcome, the enhanced possibility of medical failure during these procedures. The practice of medicine inherently involves risks while dealing with one´s most fundamental and essential belonging. Hence, medical failure cannot be taken lightly or benevolently. Any offenses to such rights are rebuked by the Judiciary, that bring forth the basic assumptions of prudence, skill and diligence through the institution of civil responsibility, pointing to the need for regular attitudes of medical-related professionals and proper reasoning when examining possible illicit, as well as fair and equal conviction, based on the specific technical analysis regarding the professional´s conduct, whilst observing all procedural, ethical and legal principles. Therefore, this publication intends to present the jurisdictional tutelage of bariatric surgery concerning the physicians accountability for his or her mistake by applying the theory of civil accountability, identifying the nature and occurrence of the errors that provoke or lay grounds for legal action, as well as the regular procedures advised in order to prevent accountability.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-05T17:20:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 16 / Nenhuma / A presente dissertação tem o objetivo de discutir o problema da responsabilização dos fornecedores de alimentos quimicamente manipulados e geneticamente modificados por riscos e danos causados à saúde e à vida do consumidor, nos casos de risco de desenvolvimento, pois não há disposição legislativa no CDC brasileiro que regule, de forma clara, essa questão. Utilizar-se-á, como referencial teórico para este trabalho, a teoria da sociedade de risco de Ulrich Beck, a qual possibilitará demonstrar, na atualidade, o contexto de risco em que se encontra a produção no setor alimentício. E, a partir de estudos sobre Biodireito e Bioética, buscar-se-á uma base argumentativa que apresente possibilidades para que o sistema jurídico atue garantindo a proteção da saúde e da vida humana. Após essas considerações, percebe-se que, diante da fragilidade e da vulnerabilidade da vida, não é possível a exclusão da responsabilidade civil para os fornecedores de alimentos com base no risco de desenvolvimento. / The present dissertation has the main point the discussion the genetic modified and chemistry manipulated food supplier accountability by risks and damages to health and life of the consumer in development risk cases, because the Brazilian Consumers Law hasn’t clear provisions about these question. Using how theoretical reference, for this work, the risk society theory of Ulrich Beck, that shows the risk contest that finds the production in the food industry. Since this studies about Biolaw and Bioethic, will search argumentations that present possibilities so that juridical systems act to the protection of the human health and life. After these consideration, will realize that, beyond a fragility and the vulnerability of life, it’s not possible the civil accountability exclusion to the food suppliers, based in the development risk

La présente étude a pour objectif de vérifier si le Canada respecte les prescriptions internationales en matière de droits de l’homme et d’entreprises vis-à-vis de l’encadrement qu’il exerce sur les sociétés minières canadiennes évoluant à l’étranger. En 2011, le Conseil des droits de l’homme de l’ONU a adopté des «Principes directeurs» afin de mettre en oeuvre le cadre de référence « Protéger, Respecter, Réparer » du Représentant spécial chargé de la question des droits de l’homme et des sociétés transnationales et autres entreprises. Selon ce cadre de référence, les États ont des obligations de protection et de réparation alors que les entreprises ont seulement la responsabilité de respecter les droits humains. Après six années de travail, le Représentant spécial John Ruggie, a fait le choix de formuler dans ses «Principes directeurs» des directives non contraignantes à l’égard des États et des entreprises afin de les aider à remplir leurs obligations et responsabilités vis-à-vis des droits de l’homme. Selon, l’ONU, cet instrument de portée universelle est le plus élaboré en la matière, si bien qu’il est recommandé aux entreprises et plus particulièrement aux États de s’y conformer lors de l’élaboration de leurs politiques respectives en matière d'activité économique et de droits humains. Il convient donc de vérifier d’une part si l’encadrement exercé par l’appareil législatif et gouvernemental vis-à-vis des sociétés minières canadiennes évoluant à l’étranger est conforme au principe directeur «Protéger». D’autres part, il convient de vérifier si les recours judiciaires et extrajudiciaires disponibles au Canada remplissent les exigences du principe directeur «Réparer». Cette double analyse permettra de conclure que le Canada respecte dans les grandes lignes ces «Principes directeurs» mais qu’il pourrait faire bien plus notamment en terme d’accès à des réparations effectives pour les victimes étrangères de minières canadiennes. / This study propose to assess whether Canada meets the international requirements of business and human rights in relation to the supervision it has on Canadian mining companies operating abroad. In 2011, the Human rights Council adopted the Special Representative’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in order to implement the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. According to this framework, States have obligations to protect and remedy while companies only have responsibilities to respect human rights. After six years of work, the Special Representative on Business and Human rights, John Ruggie, has chosen to give in its Guiding Principles non- binding recommendations in order to help States and businesses to encounter their obligations and responsibilities towards human rights. According to the UN, this universal instrument is the most developed in the field. Thus, it is strongly recommended that companies and especially States, comply those «guiding principles» when they elaborate their respective policies on economic activity and human rights. It is therefore necessary to check first if the supervision exercised by the legislature and the government on Canadian mining companies operating abroad succeeds to comply with the "Protect" principles. On the other hand, it must be checked whether the judicial and extrajudicial remedies available in Canada meet the requirements of the «Remedy" principles. This dual analysis will led to conclude that Canada meets broadly the "Guiding Principles" but could do much more, especially in terms of access to effective remedies for foreign victims of Canadian mining companies.

La présente étude a pour objectif de vérifier si le Canada respecte les prescriptions internationales en matière de droits de l’homme et d’entreprises vis-à-vis de l’encadrement qu’il exerce sur les sociétés minières canadiennes évoluant à l’étranger. En 2011, le Conseil des droits de l’homme de l’ONU a adopté des «Principes directeurs» afin de mettre en oeuvre le cadre de référence « Protéger, Respecter, Réparer » du Représentant spécial chargé de la question des droits de l’homme et des sociétés transnationales et autres entreprises. Selon ce cadre de référence, les États ont des obligations de protection et de réparation alors que les entreprises ont seulement la responsabilité de respecter les droits humains. Après six années de travail, le Représentant spécial John Ruggie, a fait le choix de formuler dans ses «Principes directeurs» des directives non contraignantes à l’égard des États et des entreprises afin de les aider à remplir leurs obligations et responsabilités vis-à-vis des droits de l’homme. Selon, l’ONU, cet instrument de portée universelle est le plus élaboré en la matière, si bien qu’il est recommandé aux entreprises et plus particulièrement aux États de s’y conformer lors de l’élaboration de leurs politiques respectives en matière d'activité économique et de droits humains. Il convient donc de vérifier d’une part si l’encadrement exercé par l’appareil législatif et gouvernemental vis-à-vis des sociétés minières canadiennes évoluant à l’étranger est conforme au principe directeur «Protéger». D’autres part, il convient de vérifier si les recours judiciaires et extrajudiciaires disponibles au Canada remplissent les exigences du principe directeur «Réparer». Cette double analyse permettra de conclure que le Canada respecte dans les grandes lignes ces «Principes directeurs» mais qu’il pourrait faire bien plus notamment en terme d’accès à des réparations effectives pour les victimes étrangères de minières canadiennes. / This study propose to assess whether Canada meets the international requirements of business and human rights in relation to the supervision it has on Canadian mining companies operating abroad. In 2011, the Human rights Council adopted the Special Representative’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in order to implement the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. According to this framework, States have obligations to protect and remedy while companies only have responsibilities to respect human rights. After six years of work, the Special Representative on Business and Human rights, John Ruggie, has chosen to give in its Guiding Principles non- binding recommendations in order to help States and businesses to encounter their obligations and responsibilities towards human rights. According to the UN, this universal instrument is the most developed in the field. Thus, it is strongly recommended that companies and especially States, comply those «guiding principles» when they elaborate their respective policies on economic activity and human rights. It is therefore necessary to check first if the supervision exercised by the legislature and the government on Canadian mining companies operating abroad succeeds to comply with the "Protect" principles. On the other hand, it must be checked whether the judicial and extrajudicial remedies available in Canada meet the requirements of the «Remedy" principles. This dual analysis will led to conclude that Canada meets broadly the "Guiding Principles" but could do much more, especially in terms of access to effective remedies for foreign victims of Canadian mining companies.