43 that a person subject to arbitrary detention experiences deep suffering,64 accentuated in the case of children.65 It is reasonable to conclude that such distress extends to the closest members of the family, especially those who were in close emotional contact with the victim. No evidence is required to reach this conclusion.66 As has been proven, the above also extends to the parents, to the grandmother on his father’s side and to his sister, Lorena Beatriz, who had close ties with Walter David Bulacio as members of an integrated family. 99. This Court deems that it was proven (supra 69.D.8) that the damage suffered by Walter David Bulacio’s father, mother, sister and grandmother includes, significantly, the deep depression of the parents and the loss of the possibility of caring for their children, in this case by the father. Walter David Bulacio lost his job and tried to commit suicide several times, as did the sister of the victim, who also suffered bulimia. Finally, María Ramona Armas de Bulacio, the victim’s grandmother, who participated very actively in the processing of the case, suffered grave physical and psychological consequences. 100. Despite the fact that compensation for future medical expenses was not included in the requests made by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives, the Court finds that compensation for non-pecuniary damage should also include, based on information received, case law67 and the proven facts, an amount of money for future medical expenses of the next of kin of the victim: Lorena Beatriz Bulacio, Graciela Rosa Scavone and María Ramona Armas de Bulacio, as there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the suffering of the latter originated both in what happened to Walter David Bulacio and in the subsequent pattern of impunity (supra 69.C.6, 69.D.9 and infra 119 and 120). The Court deems it appropriate to set as compensation for said component, in fairness, the amount of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) to be distributed in equal parts among Lorena Beatriz Bulacio, Graciela Rosa Scavone and María Ramona Armas de Bulacio. 101. It was demonstrated that there was impunity in the instant case (supra 69.D.9, which has caused and continues to cause suffering to the next of kin, who feel vulnerable and defenseless vis-à-vis the State, a situation that causes them deep anguish and does not allow them to carry out their lives in a normal manner. 102. Bearing in mind what has been stated regarding the damage caused, the Court sets the value of compensations for non-pecuniary damage, which must be paid to the next of kin of the victim, as follows: 64 Cf., Juan Humberto Sánchez Case, supra note 4, para. 174; Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 85; and Bámaca Velásquez Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 62. 65 Cf., “Street Children” Case (Villagrán Morales at al.). Reparations, supra note 30, para. 91.b); and Juridical status and human rights of the child, supra note 4, para. 87. 66 Cf., Juan Humberto Sánchez Case, supra note 4, para. 175; El Caracazo Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 50 e); and Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 88. 67 Cf., Cantoral Benavides Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 51; Blake Case, Reparations, supra note 60, para. 50; and Loayza Tamayo Case, Reparations, supra note 47, para. 129.d).