38 151. For all these reasons, the claim seeking reparation, to the extent possible and by appropriate means, for the loss of options that the wrongful acts caused to the victim is entirely admissible. The reparation is thus closer to what it should be in order to satisfy the exigencies of justice: complete redress of the wrongful injury. In other words, it more closely approximates the ideal of restitutio in integrum. 152. It is obvious that the violations committed against the victim in the instant Case prevented her from achieving her goals for personal and professional growth, goals that would have been feasible under normal circumstances. Those violations caused irreparable damage to her life, forcing her to interrupt her studies and to take up life in a foreign country far from the context in which her life had been evolving, in a state of solitude, poverty, and severe physical and psychological distress. Obviously this combination of circumstances, directly attributable to the violations that this Court examined, has seriously and probably irreparably altered the life of Ms. Loayza-Tamayo, and has prevented her from achieving the personal, family and professional goals that she had reasonably set for herself. 153. The Court recognizes the existence of grave damage to the “life plan” of Ms. María Elena Loayza-Tamayo, caused by violations of her human rights. Nevertheless, neither case law nor doctrine has evolved to the point where acknowledgment of damage to a life plan can be translated into economic terms. Hence, the Court is refraining from quantifying it. It notes, however, that the victim’s recourse to international tribunals and issuance of the corresponding judgment constitute some measure of satisfaction for damages of these kinds. 154. The condemnation represented by the material and moral damages ordered on other points of this Judgment should be some compensation for the victim for the suffering these violations have caused her; still, it would be difficult to restore or offer back to her the options for personal fulfillment of which she has been unjustly deprived. XIII OTHER FORMS OF REPARATION 155. In her reparations brief, the victim petitioned the Court to order a) That the State publicly apologize to her and to her next of kin by publishing press releases in the five major Peruvian newspapers, the "official journal" among them, and in newspapers with an international circulation; b) That the State guarantee that her honor and the honor of her next of kin is restored and that it acknowledge, to the Peruvian public and to the international community, that it is responsible for the events of which she was the victim, and that it give public and mass circulation to the Judgment delivered on September 17, 1997. 156. The Commission did not raise this issue in its reparations brief. 157. The State indicated that when the victim was released, the mass her release wide national coverage; the public was, therefore, informed and the publicity objective achieved. The State noted that the victim submitted a video containing information about the news reports of order. media gave of the facts had herself her release