Role of the courts in the progressive realization of the right to health: Between the threat and the promise of judicialization in Mexico

Norman Daniels, Sofia Charvel, Adriane H. Gelpi, Thalia Porteny, Julian Urrutia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

A moral right to health or health care, given reasonable resource constraints, implies a reasonable array of services, as determined by a fair deliberative process. Such a right can be embodied in a constitution where it becomes a legal right with similar entitlements. What is the role of the courts in deciding what these entitlements are? The threat of “judicialization” is that the courts may overreach their ability if they attempt to carry out this task; the promise of judicialization is that the courts can do better than health systems have done at determining such entitlements. We propose a middle ground that requires the health system to develop a fair, deliberative process for determining how to achieve the progressive realization of the same right to health or health care and that also requires the courts to develop the capacity to assess whether the deliberative process in the health system is fair.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)229-234
Number of pages6
JournalHealth Systems and Reform
Volume1
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Informatics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Information Management

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Role of the courts in the progressive realization of the right to health: Between the threat and the promise of judicialization in Mexico'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this