CONTRADICTORY COURT DECISIONS ABOUT THE COVERAGE OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION TREATMENT BY HEALTH INSURANCES Rui Licinio de Castro Paixão Filho

Abstract

One of the major causes of the health judicialization in Brazil is due to the divergence between judges and courts about the coverage of assisted reproduction treatments. This study aims to show the factors that lead higher courts, especially the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), to deny such coverage and the reasons why these decisions need to be reviewed. The method used is deductive, through doctrinal and jurisprudential studies on the subject. The results show that the STJ has based its decisions on Statement No. 20 issued by the National Council of Justice
(CNJ) and art. 10, III of Law No. 9,656 / 1998, besides restricting the scope of art. 35 -C, III of that same law. However, the STJ's reasoning comes from a statement not issued by a court that contradicts established Federal Supreme Court (STF) precepts in derogated provisions of law and disregards that these treatments are recognized by the World Health Organization, with due coverage. This article concludes by pointing to the decisions of the STJ about what has been approached here as mistaken, pointing to the view of judges as more up-to-date and coherent to address
the coverage of these types of treatment.