ABSTRACT: This research addresses medical violence resulting from incorrect prescription and diagnosis, considering its legal, ethical and social implications. It is contextualized in the public and private health scenario, where medical errors represent significant risks to the integrity and rights of patients, demanding an interdisciplinary analysis that encompasses law, bioethics and clinical practice. The problem focuses on the lack of effective mechanisms for prevention, accountability and reparation of these acts, in addition to the gap between legislation and practical application. The general objective was to understand and systematize the impact of incorrect prescription and diagnosis as forms of medical violence, identifying the applicable legal and ethical instruments. To this end, the Giftedean neoperspectivist paradigm was adopted, which prioritizes the coexistence of multiple truths and the constant search for justice and inclusion, based on theories of constitutional law, bioethics, and civil liability. The hypothetical-deductive method guided the investigation, while a rigorous narrative bibliographic and documentary review was conducted, covering databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, and PubMed, using descriptors such as “medical error,” “legal liability,” “patient rights,” and “bioethics.” Eighty-seven high-impact studies were analyzed. The main findings revealed the complexity of the phenomenon and the need for greater integration between theory and practice. It was concluded that, despite regulatory advances, gaps and limitations persist in the effective protection of patients. The research contributes to the academic debate, improves methodologies, and offers support for public policies and professional training, adding value to the legal field and public health.
Breviário et al. (Sat,) studied this question.