The dilemma of the judiciary: law and acess to medicines

to allow access to drugs recommended by health professionals, many people have resorted to the legal arena by filing lawsuits against the union, states or counties requesting drugs. This phenomenon requires the public sector major challenge in structuring health policiesand service organization. Objective: To understand the speech of judges who judged that deferred action and requested medicines were brought against the state of Santa Catarina between 2000 and 2006. Methodology: The arguments of the judges in stock deferrals were analyzed using the methodology of the Collective Subject Discourse (CSD). The sample needed to conduct this analysis was of 486 shares and the program was used Qualiquantisoft. Results: Through the methodology of the DSC were found three predominant central ideas, namely: (A) The right to life and health must be guaranteed by the state, according to the Federal Constitution and state Constitution, with 73.25% share, followed the ideal central (B) The proponent of Justice defends the greater good that is life and not the state interest with 6.79% stake and 19.96% of the shares with the central idea (C) The author is carrying a specific disease, therefore needs a drug for treatment and has no financial position to acquire it. Discussion: In decisions handed down by judges found that the speech was about the most used legal framework, not dealing with the public policies exist, or therapeutic choices to the detriment of drugs that were part of some government program.