THE LEGAL NATURE OF THE CONTINUOUS CASH BENEFIT (BPC) AND ITS INABILITY TO GENERATE ENTITLEMENT TO A SURVIVOR'S PENSION FOR DEPENDENTS UNDER 18

Abstract

This article addresses the legal nature of the Continuous Cash Benefit (BPC) and the impossibility of converting it into a survivor's pension for the beneficiaries' dependents under the age of 18. The research addresses the legal and social issue regarding the lack of continued legal support for the dependents of BPC recipients—a benefit of a social assistance, non-contributory nature. In this context, it seeks to answer the following question: is it legally possible to extend the survivor's pension to dependents under the age of 18 of Continuous Cash Benefit (BPC) recipients—considering its social assistance rather than social security character—in light of constitutional principles? The general objective of the research is to demonstrate the need to reinterpret the BPC in light of constitutional principles such as human dignity, comprehensive protection of children and adolescents, social solidarity, equality, and the prohibition of social regression. Specific objectives include understanding the benefit's legal nature, examining the constitutionality of the legal prohibition regarding the survivor's pension, and analyzing doctrinal and jurisprudential positions on the subject, particularly within the Federal Regional Courts. The methodology employs bibliographic and documentary research with a qualitative approach, based on a critical analysis of legislation, legal doctrine, and court rulings. Expected results indicate that, although current legislation denies the continuation of the benefit due to its social assistance nature, such a limitation appears incompatible with constitutional principles of social protection and human dignity.