The debatable role of courts in Brazil's health care system: does litigation harm or help?

Recent studies of the Brazilian case suggest that successful litigation can have regressive effects and negatively impact the health care system. While the data to support this claim is not conclusive, this paper assumes that such immediate regressive effects are indeed taking place, but asks if these are the only consequences that should be analyzed in assessing the impact of right to health litigation in Brazil. The answer is no. The current perspective adopted to assess right to health litigation in Brazil is too narrow. Other consequences can and should be considered in analyzing the overall impact of litigation. To go beyond the set of questions asked by the existing experts on the topic, this paper analyzes whether the right to health litigation in Brazil has the potential, and could be generating: (i) policy changes within the health care system; (ii) institutional changes within the health care system; and (iii) institutional changes outside the health care system. After presenting anecdotal evidence that suggests these three types of changes may be happening in Brazil, I conclude the paper by discussing what would be required to assess them, and how these changes may affect our overall assessment of the more immediate and supposedly negative impact that litigation has had on the system.