Esta dissertação tem como objetivo discutir a questão da exigibilidade do direito à saúde no Brasil e seu impacto sobre a formulação e implementação de políticas públicas (mínimo existencial x reserva do possível). Aborda-se a evolução histórica da saúde até sua consagração como direito fundamental na Constituição Brasileira de 1988. Por meio da jurisprudência formada favoravelmente à saúde, os tribunais pátrios têm assumido papel ativo na interpretação e na proteção desse direito. Várias vezes, as decisões judiciais determinam, na prática, uma redefinição das políticas públicas do Executivo. Trata-se de um contexto que vem incentivando as pessoas ao ajuizamento de ações para exigir a concretização do direito à saúde, fenômeno também conhecido como judicialização do direito à saúde. Tal ativismo se explica pelo fato de o Judiciário considerar que a ineficiência administrativa e o método de priorização da atenção à saúde revelam falhas que interferem na proteção do acesso à saúde, reconhecendo-os como verdadeiro descumprimento do dever estatal em relação a tal direito. / The current paper aims to discuss the issue of exigibility of the right to health in Brazil and their impact on the formulation and implementation of public policies (existential minimum x reserve for contingencies). In this sense, it approaches the origin of the inclusion of the right to health as a fundamental in the Brazilian Constitution of 1988. Through the jurisprudence created while ruling writs of protection, Brazilian courts have assumed an active role in interpreting and protecting those rights. On several occasions, court rulings have forced the Executive to redefine its policies. This context has led individuals to use writs to seek the realization of their right to health, a phenomenon also called judicialization of the right to health. This activism is explained by the fact that the courts regard administrative inefficiencies and prioritization processes of health services that fail to protect an individuals access, as a violation of government duties towards this right.

Problem behavior is a concern for individuals with developmental disabilities. Research suggests that a release contingency time-out is effective to reduce problem behavior, but may increase the duration of time-out. Other sources recommend including a release contingency to avoid reinforcing problem behavior. It is possible clinicians generalize this concept to other domains, such as differential reinforcement with discrete-trial-training. Such a modification may be conceptualized as a tandem ratio requirement. Evidence from basic literature suggests that a tandem ratio requirement may increase a bout of responding. The current study examined effects of applied behavior analytic procedures using a bout analysis. The purpose was to identify a best-practice recommendation for clinicians to use when patterns of bout-like responding are evident, in order to efficiently decrease the duration of a bout. Three children with ASD participated. Results showed that release contingencies influenced bout-like responding in two participants. Social validity was assessed on the feasibility, efficacy, and likeability of the study. Social validity measures indicated the study had appreciable effects on problem behavior.

Selective attention to dysphoric stimuli is hypothesized to contribute to the onset and maintenance of emotional disorders. Over the past two decades, research on training and modifying attention as a form of treatment for anxiety and depression, Attentional Bias Modification (ABM) treatment, has increased exponentially. ABM has been employed in research and clinical settings with varying levels of success due to vast heterogeneity among studies. The primary aims of the present study were to examine the effects of different training contingencies, stimulus pairs, and moderators (baseline attentional bias, self-report trait anxiety, and attentional control) on stress reactivity and recovery. Undergraduates (N = 376) were randomly assigned to one of five conditions: four attention conditions each unique in training contingency and stimulus pair, and one control condition. Participants completed self-report measures, a pre-assessment of attention, one of the five conditions, a post-assessment of attention, and a stress induction. Results suggest stimulus types in AMB paradigms have a greater impact on stress responses relative to training contingencies. Participants with high levels of anxiety showed reduced stress recovery after conditions with negative stimuli. Participants with high levels of depression showed less stress reactivity after conditions with emotional stimuli. Attentional control and trait anxiety moderated stress responses. The current findings may be important in advancing ABM treatment by highlighting the significance of including emotional stimuli in ABM paradigms and tailoring treatment with baseline characteristics.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

An examination of the management accounting systems literature revealed the need for additional research based on a contingency perspective. Specifically, additional empirical research based on a well-articulated theory. A theoretical model was developed building on Galbraith’s theory of organization structure. Two sources of uncertainty -- environmental uncertainty and task uncertainty -- were viewed as forming the information processing requirements faced by the organization. In response to these requirements, organizations were viewed as adapting by altering their level of decentralization and their use of budget systems. Organizational effectiveness was achieved by a proper fit between the uncertainty faced by the organization and these responses. Data were collected from business unit managers using a survey instrument. A total of 103 usable responses were obtained with an overall response rate of 49%. Previously developed measures were used for all variables except for budget system usefulness. A measure for this variable was developed and validated. The data were examined using path analysis. The data did not support the model. Problems encountered in the use of perceptual measures for the uncertainty variables appeared to be the most likely explanation for the weak results. However, when the data was split based on the performance measure an interesting result was observed. Specifically, the relationships between the uncertainty measures, decentralization, and budget system usefulness were different for the low and high-performance group. An explanation for this tinding was offered. / Ph. D.

Several cascading outages that have occurred in the past have shown the importance of performing appropriate and coordinated transmission system planning between the different Planning Coordinators and Transmission Planners in a power system. In very large, interconnected systems, this coordinated planning is necessary due to the inherent complexity that characterizes non-lineal electric power systems. A major task in transmission system planning is to conduct contingency studies that would determine the consequences in the system when single or multiple of its elements trip due to failure or are disconnected during scheduled maintenance outages. This work develops general programs aimed at facilitating the performance of such contingency studies based on the latest Transmission System Planning Performance Requirement standard issued by NERC, TPL-001-4. The focus of this work is on the requirements for the steady state analysis described in the standard, which includes specific steady state performance planning events. The developed programs have been tested in a few base cases and have demonstrated their ability to facilitate contingency studies with any system regardless of its size. / Master of Science

OPSOMMING Gebeurlikhede kan omskryf word as onsekere omstandighede van positiewe of negatiewe aard wat, onafhanklik van die verweerder se optrede en indien dit sou realiseer, waarskynlik 'n persoon se gesondheid, inkomste, verdienvermoë, lewenskwaliteit, lewensverwagting of onderhoudsafhanklikheid in die toekoms kan beïnvloed of in die verlede kon beïnvloed het en wat gevolglik op billike en realistiese wyse in ag geneem moet word ter bepaling van die skadevergoedingsbedrag. Die skadevergoedingsbedrag kan vanweë gebeurlikhede verminder of vermeerder word waar die eiser wel met `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid die volle omvang van die skade bewys het, maar die hof nie kon oortuig dat geen ander oorsaak die skade waarskynlik ook sou kon veroorsaak nie (sg "gebeurlikheids-aanpassings"). In gevalle waar die eiser nie die volle omvang van die skade op `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid kon bewys nie, kan die hof nogtans `n verminderde bedrag toeken op grond van die gebeurlikheid dat die skade wel waarskynlik in die toekoms kan realiseer (sg "gebeurlikheidstoekennings"). Die eiser moet getuienis voorlê van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verhoog, en die verweerder van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verlaag. Die waarskynlikheid dat die gebeurlikheid sal realiseer, moet deur die hof aan die hand van objektiewe maatstawwe en op grond van feitelike bewerings en logiese afleidings uit deskundige en ander getuienis in die vorm van `n waarskynlikheidsgraad van tussen vyf persent en tagtig persent uitgedruk word. Hipotetiese kousaliteit word deur die hof aangewend om gebeurlikhede op `n billike wyse in ag te neem en verwys na die kousale ketting van hipotetiese feite wat waarskynlik sou gerealiseer het indien die skadestigtende gebeurtenis nie plaasgevind het nie. Gebeurlikhede kan in twee kategorieë geklassifiseer word: Algemene gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik in enige stadium by alle persone kan voorkom (bv vroeë dood, siekte ens) en spesifieke gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik op spesifieke tydstippe by spesifieke individue kan voorkom (bv hertroue, egskeiding ens). Terwyl die hof geregtelik kennis behoort te kan neem van die invloed van algemene gebeurlikhede, behoort die hof hoofsaaklik op grond van ondersteunende getuienis van die invloed van spesifieke gebeurlikhede oortuig te word. Algemene gebeurlikheidsaanpassings is gewoonlik relatief laag (gemiddeld tien persent), terwyl gebeurlikheidsaanpassings vir spesifieke gebeurlikhede fluktueer (gewoonlik tussen vyf persent en vyftig persent), afhangende van die getuienis en omstandighede van die eiser. Gebeurlikheidstoekennings is gewoonlik laer as vyftig persent. SUMMARY Contingencies can be described as uncertain circumstances of a positive or negative nature which, independent of the defendant's conduct and if it should realise, would probably influence a person's health, income, earning capacity, quality of life, life expectancy or dependency on support in future or could have done so in the past, and which must consequently be taken into account in a fair and realistic manner in the quantification of damages. Contingencies can be used to increase or reduce damages in circumstances where the plaintiff succeeded in proving the full loss on a preponderance of probability, but could not convince the court that there was no probability that any other cause could also have given rise to the loss (so-called "contingency adjustments"). In circumstances where the plaintiff could not prove the full loss on a preponderance of probability, the court can nevertheless award a reduced amount on the basis of the contingency that loss could probably realise in future (so-called "contingency allowances"). The plaintiff must adduce evidence of contingencies that can increase damages, and the defendant of contingencies that can reduce damages. The degree of probability that the contingency will realise, must be expressed by the court as a percentage of between five percent and eighty percent, in view of objective measures and on the basis of factual allegations and logical deductions derived from expert and other evidence. Hypothetical causation assists the court in taking account of contingencies in a fair manner and refers to the causal link of hypothetical events which would probably have realised if the damage-causing event did not occur. Contingencies can be classified into two categories: General contingencies that usually can be present in the lives of all people at any point in time (eg early death, sickness, etc) and specific contingencies that usually are present in the lives of specific individuals at specific times (eg remarriage, divorce, etc). While the court should be able to take legal notice of the influence of general contingencies, the court should be convinced of the influence of specific contingencies primarily on the basis of supporting evidence. General contingency adjustments are usually relatively low (on average ten per cent), while contingency adjustments for specific contingencies fluctuate (usually between five per cent and fifty per cent), depending on the evidence and circumstances of the plaintiff. Contingency allowances are usually lower than fifty per cent. / Jurisprudence / LL.D

OPSOMMING Gebeurlikhede kan omskryf word as onsekere omstandighede van positiewe of negatiewe aard wat, onafhanklik van die verweerder se optrede en indien dit sou realiseer, waarskynlik 'n persoon se gesondheid, inkomste, verdienvermoë, lewenskwaliteit, lewensverwagting of onderhoudsafhanklikheid in die toekoms kan beïnvloed of in die verlede kon beïnvloed het en wat gevolglik op billike en realistiese wyse in ag geneem moet word ter bepaling van die skadevergoedingsbedrag. Die skadevergoedingsbedrag kan vanweë gebeurlikhede verminder of vermeerder word waar die eiser wel met `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid die volle omvang van die skade bewys het, maar die hof nie kon oortuig dat geen ander oorsaak die skade waarskynlik ook sou kon veroorsaak nie (sg "gebeurlikheids-aanpassings"). In gevalle waar die eiser nie die volle omvang van die skade op `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid kon bewys nie, kan die hof nogtans `n verminderde bedrag toeken op grond van die gebeurlikheid dat die skade wel waarskynlik in die toekoms kan realiseer (sg "gebeurlikheidstoekennings"). Die eiser moet getuienis voorlê van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verhoog, en die verweerder van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verlaag. Die waarskynlikheid dat die gebeurlikheid sal realiseer, moet deur die hof aan die hand van objektiewe maatstawwe en op grond van feitelike bewerings en logiese afleidings uit deskundige en ander getuienis in die vorm van `n waarskynlikheidsgraad van tussen vyf persent en tagtig persent uitgedruk word. Hipotetiese kousaliteit word deur die hof aangewend om gebeurlikhede op `n billike wyse in ag te neem en verwys na die kousale ketting van hipotetiese feite wat waarskynlik sou gerealiseer het indien die skadestigtende gebeurtenis nie plaasgevind het nie. Gebeurlikhede kan in twee kategorieë geklassifiseer word: Algemene gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik in enige stadium by alle persone kan voorkom (bv vroeë dood, siekte ens) en spesifieke gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik op spesifieke tydstippe by spesifieke individue kan voorkom (bv hertroue, egskeiding ens). Terwyl die hof geregtelik kennis behoort te kan neem van die invloed van algemene gebeurlikhede, behoort die hof hoofsaaklik op grond van ondersteunende getuienis van die invloed van spesifieke gebeurlikhede oortuig te word. Algemene gebeurlikheidsaanpassings is gewoonlik relatief laag (gemiddeld tien persent), terwyl gebeurlikheidsaanpassings vir spesifieke gebeurlikhede fluktueer (gewoonlik tussen vyf persent en vyftig persent), afhangende van die getuienis en omstandighede van die eiser. Gebeurlikheidstoekennings is gewoonlik laer as vyftig persent. SUMMARY Contingencies can be described as uncertain circumstances of a positive or negative nature which, independent of the defendant's conduct and if it should realise, would probably influence a person's health, income, earning capacity, quality of life, life expectancy or dependency on support in future or could have done so in the past, and which must consequently be taken into account in a fair and realistic manner in the quantification of damages. Contingencies can be used to increase or reduce damages in circumstances where the plaintiff succeeded in proving the full loss on a preponderance of probability, but could not convince the court that there was no probability that any other cause could also have given rise to the loss (so-called "contingency adjustments"). In circumstances where the plaintiff could not prove the full loss on a preponderance of probability, the court can nevertheless award a reduced amount on the basis of the contingency that loss could probably realise in future (so-called "contingency allowances"). The plaintiff must adduce evidence of contingencies that can increase damages, and the defendant of contingencies that can reduce damages. The degree of probability that the contingency will realise, must be expressed by the court as a percentage of between five percent and eighty percent, in view of objective measures and on the basis of factual allegations and logical deductions derived from expert and other evidence. Hypothetical causation assists the court in taking account of contingencies in a fair manner and refers to the causal link of hypothetical events which would probably have realised if the damage-causing event did not occur. Contingencies can be classified into two categories: General contingencies that usually can be present in the lives of all people at any point in time (eg early death, sickness, etc) and specific contingencies that usually are present in the lives of specific individuals at specific times (eg remarriage, divorce, etc). While the court should be able to take legal notice of the influence of general contingencies, the court should be convinced of the influence of specific contingencies primarily on the basis of supporting evidence. General contingency adjustments are usually relatively low (on average ten per cent), while contingency adjustments for specific contingencies fluctuate (usually between five per cent and fifty per cent), depending on the evidence and circumstances of the plaintiff. Contingency allowances are usually lower than fifty per cent. / Jurisprudence / LL.D