67 health centers nearest to their places of residence308 in El Salvador for the time necessary. When providing the psychological or psychiatric treatment, the particular circumstances and needs of each victim must be taken into account, so that individual, family and collective treatment is provided to them, according to the agreement reached with each victim, and after an individual evaluation.309 The victims, or their legal representatives, have six months from notification of this judgment to inform the State of their intention to receive psychological and/or psychiatric treatment.310 221. In addition, the Court observes that, according to information from the representatives, some of the victims’ next of kin do not live in El Salvador. Assuming that these persons request health care under the terms of the preceding paragraph, the State must grant them, once, the sum of US$ 7,500.00 (seven thousand, five hundred United States dollars) to cover the cost of medical, psychological and/or psychiatric treatment, as well as medications and other related expenses, so that they can receive this care at their place of residence.311 222. As to the children who remain disappeared, in the event that they are found alive, they will also be beneficiaries of this measure of reparation. Therefore, the Court establishes that the State must provide them with the aforementioned medical, psychological and/or psychiatric treatment within six months (supra para. 220) from the time they are informed about this measure, and once their whereabouts have been established and their identity determined. 223. As to the representatives’ request that the Court consider granting a sum of money to any victims who may be found abroad and who decide not to return to the country, bearing in mind the possible locations of the disappeared children (supra para. 50 e), the Court considers that, should the whereabouts of José Adrián Rochac Hernández, Santos Ernesto Salinas, Emelinda Lorena Hernández, Manuel Antonio Bonilla and Ricardo Abarca Ayala be established, and if they are found to live abroad and decide not to return to the country, El Salvador must provide a sum of money to cover the costs of their medical, psychological and/or psychiatric treatment, as well as other related expenses, in their place of residence.312 Consequently, the Court orders that the State grant them, once, within six months of the beneficiaries’ communicating their intention not to return to El Salvador, the sum of US$ 7,500.00 (seven thousand five hundred United States dollars) for medical, psychological and/or psychiatric treatment, and for medicines and other related expenses. 3. Satisfaction a) Act of public acknowledgment of international responsibility 224. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to carry out a public act in acknowledgment of its international responsibility. They specified that this act must take place at the “Monument to the Disappeared Child,” located in the municipal park of Tecoluca, department of San Vicente, on March 29, the Day of the Disappeared Child in El Salvador, a symbolic date of remembrance, and that it must be publicized on a full page in each newspaper with a national Cf. Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra, para. 270, and Case of Osorio Rivera and Family v. Peru, supra, para. 256. 308 Cf. Case of the 19 Merchants v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, para. 278, and Case of Osorio Rivera and Family v. Peru, supra, para. 256. 309 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 30, 2014. Series C No. 215, para. 252, and Case of Osorio Rivera and Family v. Peru, supra, para. 256. 310 Cf. Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra, para. 270, and Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (“Diario Militar”) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 340. 311 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 1998. Series C No. 42, paras. 106. a) and m), and 129.d), and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 201. 312