the victims, 325 the Court finds it necessary to determine that the State has the obligation to provide, free of charge, through its specialized health care institutions, immediate, adequate and effective medical and psychiatric or psychological treatment to the victims, following their informed consent, including the supply without charge of any medication they may eventually require based on their medical problems. If the State cannot provide the said treatment through its public institutions, it must have recourse to private or civil society institutions. Furthermore, the respective treatment must be provided, insofar as possible, in the centers closest to their places of residence 326 in the Dominican Republic for as long as necessary. In addition, when providing the psychiatric or psychological treatment, the specific circumstances and needs of each victim must be considered, so that they are provided with family or individual treatment, as agreed with each of them following individual evaluation. 327 The victims who request this measure of reparation, or their legal representatives, have six months as of notification of this judgment to advise the State of their intention to receive medical, psychiatric or psychological treatment. 328 C.2) Satisfaction C.2.a) Publication and dissemination of the Judgment 294. The Commission asked that the State be ordered to publish the pertinent parts of this Judgment. The representatives asked the Court to order the publication of “the section on proven facts and the operative paragraphs of the Judgment in the Official Gazette and in another national daily newspaper.” 295. The Court decides, as it has in other cases, 329 that the State must publish, within six months of notification of this Judgment: (a) the official summary of the Judgment prepared by the Court, once, in the Official Gazette; (b) the official summary of the Judgment prepared by the Court, once, in a national newspaper with widespread circulation, and (c) the entire Judgment, available for one year, on an official web site. C.2.b) Public act to acknowledge international responsibility 296. The Commission and the representatives asked the Court to order the State to make a public acknowledgment of its international responsibility. The representatives asked the Court to establish “clearly and specifically, the terms and conditions” of this act. 297. As it has in other cases, 330 the Court finds it necessary, in order to repair the harm caused to the victims and to avoid the repetition of facts like those of the instant case, 331 to 325 In this regard, the Court takes note of the opinion of the family’s psychiatrist that Mr. González Medina’s family had to receive neuropsychopharmacological treatment, psychotherapy and some of them also had to receive psychoeducational care. Cf. Opinion provided by expert witness Secundino Palacios Carpio on June 16, 2011, supra note 208, folios 1148, 1149 and 1151. 326 Cf. Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 166, para. 270, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 200. 327 Cf. Case of 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs, supra note 253, para. 278, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 200. 328 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 30, 2010. Series C No. 215, para. 252, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 200. 329 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs, supra note 311, para. 79, and Case of Fontevecchia and D’Amico v. Argentina, supra note 70, para. 108. 330 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs, supra note 311, para. 81, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 206. 89