Os manicômios fecharam? Reflexões sobre a atuação do Poder Judiciário nos pedidos de internação em comunidades terapêuticas em um contexto local

Abstract

This master’s thesis, developed within the Graduate Program in Education at the Federal University of São Carlos, Sorocaba campus, investigates the role of the local Judiciary in Sorocaba in legal proceedings requesting the forced hospitalization of people who use alcohol and other drugs in therapeutic communities between 2020 and 2025. The research problem seeks to understand how the local judiciary has responded to such demands and whether its actions contribute to the perpetuation of a manicomial logic, even after the signing of a Conduct Adjustment Agreement (TAC) in 2012, through which the municipality committed itself to the gradual closure of psychiatric hospitals and the implementation of substitute mental health care services. The specific objectives include analyzing national legislation on forced hospitalization and therapeutic communities following the enactment of Law 10.216/2001 (the Psychiatric Reform Law) and examining public court cases from Civil Courts, the Public Treasury Court, and the Small Claims Public Treasury Court of Sorocaba within the defined period. The theoretical framework is organized around three main axes: a brief discussion of the historical and social phenomenon of the confinement of madness, including problematic alcohol and drug use; the historical development of the Brazilian Psychiatric Reform, highlighting milestones such as the Bauru Manifesto (1987) and the enactment of Law 10.216/2001; and the legal framework governing therapeutic communities in Brazil, with an analysis of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Decree 6.949/2009), the Brazilian Law of Inclusion (Law 13.146/2015), and other relevant regulations. Methodologically, the study adopts a case study approach, combining documentary analysis of national and municipal legislation with the examination of court rulings retrieved from the São Paulo State Court of Justice database, totaling twenty identified cases, in addition to grey literature such as technical opinions, institutional reports, and complaints produced by social movements. Case selection criteria included thematic and legal relevance, social context considering markers of gender, race, and class, conflicts between fundamental rights, and the potential to illustrate contradictions between legislation and judicial practice. The local context is particularly significant, given that Sorocaba was once the Brazilian city with the largest number of public psychiatric beds and that, even after their closure, discourses of isolation and forced treatment persist, particularly targeting people who allegedly use alcohol and other drugs, especially following the 2020 municipal executive elections. The results, presented through the analysis of two cases from the Public Treasury Court of Sorocaba and one case from the 3rd Civil Court of Sorocaba, reveal significant procedural shortcomings, including the absence of detailed medical reports, the granting of preliminary injunctions without adequate technical justification, the delayed involvement of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and inadequate legal defense of individuals subjected to judicial measures. The study demonstrates that, despite the formal advances of the Psychiatric Reform and the Anti-Asylum Movement, manicomial practices continue to be legitimized by the Judiciary, particularly in the field of alcohol and drug use, highlighting the urgent need for stronger dialogue between the justice system and public mental health management, adequate training for legal professionals, and the strengthening of the Psychosocial Care Network (RAPS) as an alternative to the asylum-based model.