O princípio da proporcionalidade como ferramenta no processo de tomada de decisão pelo método principialista, frente a conflitos bioéticos na relação do médico com o paciente.

Abstract

This dissertation aims to analyze and compare the theoretical and practical elements of the legal solution against fundamental rights and the medical issues facing bioethical conflicts by using the Principialist model. Thus, by approaching this topic we intend to identify the common similarities and divergences by transposing of knowledge in Medicine and Law fields. The Principialist model was chosen because it is widespread in Bioethics field and is based on the weighting principles for conflict resolution, as well as the legal solution. This work is a theoretical study performed by a literature review of national and international scientific literature on the key concepts of Principlism and the decision-making model, in addition to the models from Diego Gracia and the Four Topics from Albert Jonsen, Mark Siegler and William Wilslade. Through comparative analysis of the Legal Principle of Proportionality and the "conditions that restrict the weightning" from Principlism, was observed a clear correlation between them. Also, two published dilemmas were presented and properly referenced, supporting this observation. The results showed that there was a transposition of decisions by the methods presented. It was concluded then that the conceptual basis from the Principle of Proportionality may be applied as a tool in the physician's decision-making process during his relationship with the patient, with no methodological conflicts, and especially against lawsuits.