The institution of guardianship in Brazil: perspectives in comparative law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25118/2763-9037.2014.v4.201Keywords:
Civil capacity, guardianship, mentally incapableAbstract
The new Brazilian Civil Code, despite many advances, fails to maintain the integrity of rights and decision-making of individuals defined as mentally incapable by law. The institution of guardianship has the goal of protecting individuals who are considered unable to care for themselves. However, it may bring serious consequences to the mentally incapable person with regard to decision-making on basic rights like marriage,voting, the caring for and education of offspring, health care and consent with therapies, residence and other fundamental rights in community life. This article compares guardianship laws in Europe, United States, and Brazil. The Brazilian Civil Code has shown to be outdated, limiting to a great extent the personal rights of those defined as mentally incapable by law and disrespecting basic individual rights.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Doron I. Elder guardianship kaleidoscope--acomparative perspective. Int J Law Policy Family. 2002;16:368-98.
Gordon RM. Adult protection legislation in Canada. Models, issues, and problems. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2001;24:117-34.
Gordon R. The emergence of assisted (supported) decision-making in the Canadian law of adult guardianship and substitute decision-making. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2000;23:61-77.
Kapp MB. Proxy decision making in Alzheimer disease research: durable powers of attorney, guardianship, and other alternatives. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 1994;8:28-37.
Carney T, Tait D. Caught between two systems? Guardianship and young people with a disability. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1998;20:141-66.
Blankman K. Guardianship models in the Netherlands and western Europe. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1997;20:47-57.
Appelbaum PS, Grisso T. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:1635-8.
Brasil, Código civil. Lei 3.071/16. Diário Ofi cial da União, 01 janeiro 1916. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L3071impressao.htm
Araújo DS. A infl uência de Teixeira de Freitas no Brasil e no mundo [Internet]. Jus Navigandi. 2000;43. 2010 Jul [cited 2014 Sep 18]. http://jus.com.br/artigos/1907/a-influencia-de-teixeira-de-freitas-nobrasil-e-no-mundo
Rodrigues S. Direito civil. São Paulo: Saraiva; 2007. vol I.
Brasil, Código civil. Lei 10.406/02. Diário Ofi cial da União, 10 janeiro 2002. http://www3.dataprev.gov.br/sislex/paginas/11/2002/10406.htm
Rodrigues S. Direito civil atual. São Paulo: Saraiva; 2002. vol. 4.
Brasil, Código de processo civil. Lei 5.869/73. Diário Ofi cial da União, 17 janeiro 1973. http://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1970-1979/lei-5869-11-janeiro-1973-357991-norma-pl.html
Alzheimer Europe. Legal capacity and proxy decision making [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2014 Jul 7]. http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/Policy-in-Practice2/Countrycomparisons/Legal-capacity-and-proxy-decisionmaking
Alzheimer Europe. [web site]. 2007 [2014 Jul 7]. http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/index.php?lm4=997CB4D43373
Uniform Laws Commission. Adult guardianship and protective proceedings jurisdiction act [Internet]. 2007 [2014 Aug 20]. http://www.uniformlaws.org/Act.aspx?title=Adult%20Guardianship%20and%20Protective%20Proceedings%20Jurisdiction%20Act
Fridman S, Mendlowicz MV, Mecler K, Moraes T. Capacidade mental legal: revisão comparada da legislação internacional. Arq Bras Psiquiatr Neurol Med Legal. 2002;80-1:31-9.
Taborda J, Abdalla-Filho E, de Moraes T, Mecler K. Avaliação da capacidade civil. In: Taborda J, Abdalla-Filho E, Chalub M, editores. Psiquiatria forense. 2ª ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2012. p. 205-19.
Borba Telles LE, Molina-Ojeda VX, Garabito-Garcia GE, Sepúlveda-Marshall E, Taborda J. In: Taborda J, Abdalla-Filho E, Chalub M, editores. Psiquiatria forense. 2ª ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2012. p. 590-604.
Doron I. Aging in the shadow of the law: the case of elder guardianship in Israel. J Aging Soc Policy. 2004;16:59-77.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Debates em Psiquiatria allows the author (s) to keep their copyrights unrestricted. Allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction. Authors should ensure that the article is an original work without fabrication, fraud or plagiarism; does not infringe any copyright or right of ownership of any third party. Authors should also ensure that each one complies with the authorship requirements as recommended by the ICMJE and understand that if the article or part of it is flawed or fraudulent, each author shares responsibility.
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) - Debates em Psiquiatria is governed by the licencse CC-By-NC
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
