Post by messi05 on Jan 23, 2024 22:41:15 GMT -6
The family's fear due to the child's health status does not invalidate the decision to hire hospital services. With this understanding, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice reinstated the sentence that dismissed the request for cancellation of hospital debt made by family members who alleged a lack of consent when signing authorization for intensive treatment of a newborn. Unanimously, the panel recognized the situation of concern, but concluded that the hospitalization was a result of the family's free decision and that the hospital did not act abusively when charging for ICU services.
“This circumstance does not tarnish the expressed desire to contract Buy Phone Number List those services, because there was no demonstration that the appellant took advantage of this situation to charge excessive amounts, or impose unnecessary services”, pointed out the rapporteur of the hospital's special appeal, minister Nancy Andrighi. In the action for non-existence of debt, the plaintiffs claimed that the term authorizing treatment and responsibility for payment was signed in a state of danger, as the newborn child needed treatment in an ICU that was not covered by the maternity plan. previously contracted.
Deficiency of consent The request was dismissed in the first instance, but the Court of Justice of São Paulo reformed the sentence as it understood that there was a defect of consent on the part of the authors, who, according to the São Paulo court, would sign any document required of them to protection of the life of the newborn. The TJ-SP also pointed out that the family members expressed to the hospital their desire to transfer the baby to the public health network, as they would not have the financial means to cover the costs of hospitalization.
“This circumstance does not tarnish the expressed desire to contract Buy Phone Number List those services, because there was no demonstration that the appellant took advantage of this situation to charge excessive amounts, or impose unnecessary services”, pointed out the rapporteur of the hospital's special appeal, minister Nancy Andrighi. In the action for non-existence of debt, the plaintiffs claimed that the term authorizing treatment and responsibility for payment was signed in a state of danger, as the newborn child needed treatment in an ICU that was not covered by the maternity plan. previously contracted.
Deficiency of consent The request was dismissed in the first instance, but the Court of Justice of São Paulo reformed the sentence as it understood that there was a defect of consent on the part of the authors, who, according to the São Paulo court, would sign any document required of them to protection of the life of the newborn. The TJ-SP also pointed out that the family members expressed to the hospital their desire to transfer the baby to the public health network, as they would not have the financial means to cover the costs of hospitalization.
