IUD: Health plan makes agreement after demanding husband’s endorsement – 07/19/2023 – Health

Unimed Ourinhos, one of the health cooperatives that illegally demanded the husband’s consent for the insertion of the IUD (intrauterine device) in the patients, signed a judicial agreement in which it recognizes the impossibility of imposition.

The document was signed after Nudem (Specialized Nucleus for the Promotion and Defense of Women’s Rights) and Nudecon (Specialized Nucleus for Consumer Protection), groups belonging to the São Paulo Public Defender’s Office, filed a public civil action against the company.

Signed in March, the term provides for compensation of R$ 35,000 that will be directed to the Fund for Reparation of Diffuse Injured Interests. It also establishes an information campaign for the prevention of diseases that affect women for a minimum cost of R$ 10,000, which includes pamphlets, billboards and placement on the local radio.

The cooperative was contacted for comment, but did not respond by the time the report was published.

The collection of the husband’s consent for the insertion of the IUD by the Unimed units in João Monlevade and Divinópolis, in Minas Gerais, and Ourinhos, in the interior of São Paulo, was revealed by the Sheet in August 2021. At the time, the companies were responsible for serving more than 50 municipalities in both states.

The imposition was included in the consent form for the procedure and was confirmed at the customer service center of the three units. At the time, the Divinópolis and Ourinhos units reported that they abandoned the requirement after contacting the report.

The cooperative of João Monlevade, on the other hand, refused to demand the endorsement, even in the face of confirmation from the central. The cooperative stated that it only recommends that the term be shared, hence the space for the partner’s signature.

On the company’s website there is a statement that states “that the placement of an IUD, when covered by Health Plans, does not require the consent of third parties (spouses, partners, etc.), as it is an exclusive decision of the woman, in the free exercise of her fundamental right to liberty”.

The Ombudsman also managed to adjust the authorization term for the procedure, stating that the consent of the spouse is not required, as well as the training of employees to avoid recurrence.

According to the agency, the cooperative complied with the determination. Failure to comply with any of the conditions would result in a fine of BRL 45,000.

The original lawsuit asked for BRL 2 million for moral damages caused to the women subjected to the imposition.

It also demanded that the health plan produce and deliver to patients a guide on reproductive sexual rights, information on the website and in the consent form for the insertion of the IUD. The documents should indicate that the procedure can be performed without the consent of the partner.

Before filing the lawsuit, the Ombudsman tried to settle the case in the extrajudicial scope, asking the operator to prove that there would be an instruction within the company so that no one would make such a demand. The request was not granted, according to the agency.

In order to require the husband’s signature, insurers claimed to rely on Law 9263 of 1996, which provides for family planning. Until the beginning of this year, the legislation established that tubal ligation or vasectomy could only be performed with “the express consent of both spouses”, in capable men and women over 25 years of age or with at least two living children.

However, after approval of a project that removes the need for the spouse’s endorsement, the law was changed. Since March, men and women who want to undergo sterilization procedures can do so even in a marriage commitment.

The law, however, never contemplated contraceptive methods such as the IUD, which does not promote sterilization.