Objective: The aim of this work was to investigate what the orthodontist’s difficulties are, analyzing whether the adopted procedures are able to satisfy the complaints of individuals, who already concluded orthodontic therapy, according to the determinations of the civil code and the Costumer’s Defense Code, as well as the relationship between patient and professional. Methods: A questionnaire was sent by postal service to all the odonthology specialists inrolled in the CRO/RJ amounting to 990 professionals.Results: The percentual analysis of the analysis showed that 96.9% of them adopt some pattern of kind of contract. The majority (65.8%)regards the orthodontist’s Civil Responsibility as a result. In case of reincident postrentation, 87.2% of the professionals inform the individual that it’s possible and also propose them orthodontic re-treatment. Concerning the conduct adopted by the orthodontist towards the individual’s dissatisfaction, 76.5%, anyhow, try to avoid a lawsuit. Conclusion: Some professionals may be subject to future court problems, there was wide divergence between professionals in relation to the time of filing of the orthodontic documentation and there was a relative same opinion of professionals in making an oversight of the patient in the period post-restraint
