24 kin who were children when the events occurred, “post-trauma stress” generally affects their mental system differently from that of adults, because they are still growing and have developed fewer defense mechanisms. Moreover, the pathological bereavement suffered by a father or mother has an impact on their capacity to maintain loving ties with their children, and this has repercussions on the latter’s normal development. Finally, she stated that the denial of justice and impunity affect the psyche and enhance the fear of the next of kin, particularly, that the situation could be repeated within their family. So that “truth and justice always help to heal these wounds, [although] not to eradicate them.” b) Expert report of Robin Eric Hahnel, doctorate in Economics, Professor at the American University in Washington D.C., specialist in microeconomic theory and in the calculation of loss of earnings The victims of the human rights violations and their next of kin lost the benefits, income and salary that they would have earned during their working life. It is therefore necessary to calculate what they would have earned and then calculate what should be paid to the victims’ next of kin for loss of earnings, according to the payment system used. To make this calculation, it is essential to have an estimate of the time that the victim would have worked, and this makes it necessary to establish his life expectancy, according to his age at the time of his death, and not with regard to the average lifespan of any member of the population. It is also necessary to use the most recent data to make this calculation, and not the tables published at the time of his birth. The most appropriate way to calculate the loss of earnings of the victims is to establish two different dates, using as a basis the moment of the events of the case and the age at which the victim would have died from natural causes. The first period would be calculated as of the moment of the events until the date on which payment would be made. During this first stage, the State would make payment in arrears, so this would entail the payment of interest. The second period would commence on the date of payment until the time when the victim would have died from natural causes, which would result in a pre-payment; therefore, it would be necessary to discount an amount in favor of the State. In the instant case, the next of kin would have had to take out loans, paying an active rate of interest to replace the State’s payments in arrears and this is twice as high as the passive rate of interest. However, when the next of kin receive pre-payment for the future period they can invest this and it can be assumed that this investment would be at an interest rate equal to the rate received for a minimum-risk investment. Accordingly, in the case of the discount, it is necessary to use a different rate of interest to the rate of interest used to collect from the State for not having paid from the time of the abduction forwards. If it is decided to use 3% for the discount period, at least 6% should be used for the unpaid interest on the part owed from 1988 until the present. Another reason for making the division into two periods is because no one knows what would have happened in the future with the earnings of these persons; however, based on the information available, it is possible to define the human