Implicancias jurídicas de las nulidades en juicios de asistencia alimenticia

It is known that the processes in general present multiple nuances, and generate situations that hinder their normal development due to the existence of procedural acts that were carried out in a defective manner, consequently causing requests for their nullity or ineffectiveness. Among the numerous lawsuits are the food assistance lawsuits that are initiated in favor of children and adolescents in the relevant specialized jurisdiction. In many of the food assistance litigation, the magistrates base their decisions on merely formal questions, setting aside the best interests of the child, which has constitutional status, and declare nullity of procedural acts, affecting the recently mentioned principle, damaging the legitimate rights of those people who are in vulnerable situations, such as children and adolescents. The approach to procedural nullities generates a series of effects that affect the rights of the person being fed, prioritizing accessory issues over the main issue, which in this case is the right to feed a minor by those persons who are legally obliged to do so. As a result, this circumstance means that in many cases there is no awareness that such effects have a negative impact, not only on the normal processing of a process, but also on the right to prevail the Best Interest of the Child that the national constitution determines. So much so that in a particular case on Food Assistance and for didactic purposes, this article presents a court ruling where the Court of Appeal –in the best interest of the child– correctly compensated the right of the child or adolescent to be fed by his father, forcing the latter to fulfill his duty to his son, despite the vices of form that the sentence entailed, which could be corrected with the office of the Court. Consequently, I consider that, when making a decision, the Best Interest of the child or adolescent must be taken into account, aiming at the creation of new laws, government policies and budgets for this jurisdiction.Es sabido que los procesos en general presentan múltiples matices, y generan situaciones que dificultan su normal desenvolvimiento por la existencia de actos procesales que fueron practicados de manera defectuosa, provocando en consecuencia pedidos de nulidad o ineficacia de los mismos. Entre los numerosos juicios se encuentran los juicios de asistencia alimenticia que son iniciados a favor de niños y adolescentes en el fuero especializado pertinente. En muchos de los litigios de asistencia alimenticia, los magistrados fundan sus decisiones sobre cuestiones meramente formales, dejando de lado el interés superior del niño, que tiene rango constitucional, y declaran nulidades de actos procesales, afectando el principio recientemente mencionado, perjudicando los legítimos derechos de aquellas personas que se hallan en situación de vulnerabilidad, como lo son los niños y adolescentes. El planteamiento de nulidades procesales genera una serie de efectos que repercuten en los derechos del alimentado, priorizándose cuestiones accesorias por sobre la cuestión principal, que en este caso es el derecho de alimentar a un menor por parte de aquellas personas que se hallan legalmente obligadas para el efecto, dicha circunstancia hace que en muchos casos no se tome conciencia que tales efectos repercuten negativamente, no solo en la tramitación normal de un proceso, sino en el derecho de prevalecer el Interés Superior del Niño que la misma constitución nacional determina. Tal es así que en un caso particular sobre Asistencia Alimenticia y a los fines didácticos, se expone en este artículo, un fallo judicial donde el tribunal de Apelación –en aras del Interés superior del niño– compensó de manera acertada el derecho del niño o adolescente a ser alimentado por su progenitor, obligando a este último a cumplir con su deber para con su hijo, a pesar de los vicios de forma que conllevaba la sentencia, la cual pudo ser subsanada con la oficiosidad del tribunal. En consecuencia, considero que, al momento de tomar una decisión, se debe tener en cuenta el Interés Superior del niño, niña o adolescente, apuntando a la creación de nuevas leyes, políticas del gobierno y presupuestos destinados a este fuero

Treatment with tocilizumab or corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with hyperinflammatory state: a multicentre cohort study (SAM-COVID-19)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to estimate the association between tocilizumab or corticosteroids and the risk of intubation or death in patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) with a hyperinflammatory state according to clinical and laboratory parameters. Methods: A cohort study was performed in 60 Spanish hospitals including 778 patients with COVID-19 and clinical and laboratory data indicative of a hyperinflammatory state. Treatment was mainly with tocilizumab, an intermediate-high dose of corticosteroids (IHDC), a pulse dose of corticosteroids (PDC), combination therapy, or no treatment. Primary outcome was intubation or death; follow-up was 21 days. Propensity score-adjusted estimations using Cox regression (logistic regression if needed) were calculated. Propensity scores were used as confounders, matching variables and for the inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). Results: In all, 88, 117, 78 and 151 patients treated with tocilizumab, IHDC, PDC, and combination therapy, respectively, were compared with 344 untreated patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 10 (11.4%), 27 (23.1%), 12 (15.4%), 40 (25.6%) and 69 (21.1%), respectively. The IPTW-based hazard ratios (odds ratio for combination therapy) for the primary endpoint were 0.32 (95%CI 0.22-0.47; p < 0.001) for tocilizumab, 0.82 (0.71-1.30; p 0.82) for IHDC, 0.61 (0.43-0.86; p 0.006) for PDC, and 1.17 (0.86-1.58; p 0.30) for combination therapy. Other applications of the propensity score provided similar results, but were not significant for PDC. Tocilizumab was also associated with lower hazard of death alone in IPTW analysis (0.07; 0.02-0.17; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Tocilizumab might be useful in COVID-19 patients with a hyperinflammatory state and should be prioritized for randomized trials in this situatio

Clonal chromosomal mosaicism and loss of chromosome Y in elderly men increase vulnerability for SARS-CoV-2

The pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19) had an estimated overall case fatality ratio of 1.38% (pre-vaccination), being 53% higher in males and increasing exponentially with age. Among 9578 individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 in the SCOURGE study, we found 133 cases (1.42%) with detectable clonal mosaicism for chromosome alterations (mCA) and 226 males (5.08%) with acquired loss of chromosome Y (LOY). Individuals with clonal mosaic events (mCA and/or LOY) showed a 54% increase in the risk of COVID-19 lethality. LOY is associated with transcriptomic biomarkers of immune dysfunction, pro-coagulation activity and cardiovascular risk. Interferon-induced genes involved in the initial immune response to SARS-CoV-2 are also down-regulated in LOY. Thus, mCA and LOY underlie at least part of the sex-biased severity and mortality of COVID-19 in aging patients. Given its potential therapeutic and prognostic relevance, evaluation of clonal mosaicism should be implemented as biomarker of COVID-19 severity in elderly people. Among 9578 individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 in the SCOURGE study, individuals with clonal mosaic events (clonal mosaicism for chromosome alterations and/or loss of chromosome Y) showed an increased risk of COVID-19 lethality

Implicancias jurídicas de las nulidades en juicios de asistencia alimenticia

It is known that the processes in general present multiple nuances, and generate situations that hinder their normal development due to the existence of procedural acts that were carried out in a defective manner, consequently causing requests for their nullity or ineffectiveness. Among the numerous lawsuits are the food assistance lawsuits that are initiated in favor of children and adolescents in the relevant specialized jurisdiction. In many of the food assistance litigation, the magistrates base their decisions on merely formal questions, setting aside the best interests of the child, which has constitutional status, and declare nullity of procedural acts, affecting the recently mentioned principle, damaging the legitimate rights of those people who are in vulnerable situations, such as children and adolescents. The approach to procedural nullities generates a series of effects that affect the rights of the person being fed, prioritizing accessory issues over the main issue, which in this case is the right to feed a minor by those persons who are legally obliged to do so. As a result, this circumstance means that in many cases there is no awareness that such effects have a negative impact, not only on the normal processing of a process, but also on the right to prevail the Best Interest of the Child that the national constitution determines. So much so that in a particular case on Food Assistance and for didactic purposes, this article presents a court ruling where the Court of Appeal –in the best interest of the child– correctly compensated the right of the child or adolescent to be fed by his father, forcing the latter to fulfill his duty to his son, despite the vices of form that the sentence entailed, which could be corrected with the office of the Court. Consequently, I consider that, when making a decision, the Best Interest of the child or adolescent must be taken into account, aiming at the creation of new laws, government policies and budgets for this jurisdiction.Es sabido que los procesos en general presentan múltiples matices, y generan situaciones que dificultan su normal desenvolvimiento por la existencia de actos procesales que fueron practicados de manera defectuosa, provocando en consecuencia pedidos de nulidad o ineficacia de los mismos. Entre los numerosos juicios se encuentran los juicios de asistencia alimenticia que son iniciados a favor de niños y adolescentes en el fuero especializado pertinente. En muchos de los litigios de asistencia alimenticia, los magistrados fundan sus decisiones sobre cuestiones meramente formales, dejando de lado el interés superior del niño, que tiene rango constitucional, y declaran nulidades de actos procesales, afectando el principio recientemente mencionado, perjudicando los legítimos derechos de aquellas personas que se hallan en situación de vulnerabilidad, como lo son los niños y adolescentes. El planteamiento de nulidades procesales genera una serie de efectos que repercuten en los derechos del alimentado, priorizándose cuestiones accesorias por sobre la cuestión principal, que en este caso es el derecho de alimentar a un menor por parte de aquellas personas que se hallan legalmente obligadas para el efecto, dicha circunstancia hace que en muchos casos no se tome conciencia que tales efectos repercuten negativamente, no solo en la tramitación normal de un proceso, sino en el derecho de prevalecer el Interés Superior del Niño que la misma constitución nacional determina. Tal es así que en un caso particular sobre Asistencia Alimenticia y a los fines didácticos, se expone en este artículo, un fallo judicial donde el tribunal de Apelación –en aras del Interés superior del niño– compensó de manera acertada el derecho del niño o adolescente a ser alimentado por su progenitor, obligando a este último a cumplir con su deber para con su hijo, a pesar de los vicios de forma que conllevaba la sentencia, la cual pudo ser subsanada con la oficiosidad del tribunal. En consecuencia, considero que, al momento de tomar una decisión, se debe tener en cuenta el Interés Superior del niño, niña o adolescente, apuntando a la creación de nuevas leyes, políticas del gobierno y presupuestos destinados a este fuero