The Bolsonarist deputy (PL-SC) presented a bill to prevent them from covering surgical and therapeutic procedures aimed at , such as voice adjustment and surgeries to modify genital anatomy.
The text also states that the (Unified Health System) is not obliged to pay for these interventions.
Zanatta’s proposal adds articles to the law that deals with health plans to exclude from the minimum mandatory coverage “procedures, surgical or therapeutic, aimed at vocal adaptation or the modification of physical characteristics linked to biological sex, when not resulting from illness or the need to restore compromised organic function”.
It specifies, in the text, that the measure includes interventions such as glottoplasty [cirurgia nas cordas vocais] and therapeutic protocols for feminization or masculinization of the voice.
The Bolsonarista’s project also says that the denial of coverage based on the proposed article “does not constitute an abusive practice nor does it generate, in itself, moral damage”.
Zanatta also seeks to prevent the (National Supplementary Health Agency) from including surgical and therapeutic procedures aimed at sexual reassignment in the list of mandatory coverage.
In another device, which changes the health law, the Bolsonarista targets the provision of these interventions by the government. It proposes to exclude from the Union’s responsibilities “the incorporation, acquisition, financing or funding of procedures of an aesthetic nature or vocal adaptation linked to biological sex”.
Zanatta’s text says that Conitec (National Commission for the Incorporation of Technologies in the Unified Health System) is prohibited from “analyzing, recommending or incorporating procedures of an aesthetic nature or vocal adequacy linked to biological sex.”
And it states that it is not the SUS’ obligation to “fund procedures of an aesthetic nature or vocal adequacy linked to biological sex.”
In her justification, the parliamentarian says that the proposal is necessary in view of judicial decisions from the STJ (Superior Court of Justice) “which, due to the lack of regulatory clarity, have been imposing on operators the coverage of such procedures, even though they are not on the ANS list”.
“Such practice constitutes judicial activism, in which the Judiciary acts as a positive legislator, challenging the principle of legality and the regulatory competence of the National Supplementary Health Agency”, he writes.
For her, the “absence of express exclusion for aesthetic procedures and vocal adequacy related to biological sex leaves room for expansive judicial interpretations, which compromise legal certainty, the actuarial balance of contracts and the sustainability of the supplementary health system, which today serves more than 50 million Brazilians.”
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
