47 cries, revealing a suffering that is always present.”136 In relation to the children of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní, the expert psychological report indicated that Marco Antonio CantoralLozano is trapped in a “vicious circle” because he is unable to construct solid social and personal relationships, and this “without doubt” requires therapy.137 197. The Court notes that, according to this expert report some of Saúl CantoralHuamaní’s other children suffer specific ailments that require special therapeutic treatment.138 198. The Court also notes that, owing to the attack to which she was subjected (supra para. 115), Gertrudis Victoria Cantoral-Huamaní, Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní’s sister, “has suffered from “a terrible fear that prevents her from leaving her house alone”; also when “her husband or her children go out, she wants to follow them.”139 Gertrudis Victoria has started to attend therapy. The expert psychological report suggests that support must be provided to enable her to continue this therapy until she has been able to “resolve the conflicts on which her symptoms of fear and insecurity are based.”140 199. Amelia Beatriz Santa Cruz, who is 75 years old, stated that, following the death of her daughter, Consuelo García-Santa Cruz, she has had “a heart problem,” and suffers from “a number of physical ailments.”141 In addition, she emphasized that the death of her daughter caused psychological damage to “most of [her] children,” because they were “tremendously upset” by what was done to them.142 The expert psychological opinion stated that “Doña Amelia should receive therapy.”143 200. In order to help repair the physical and mental damage, the Court considers it necessary to declare that the State has the obligation to provide, free of charge and immediately, through its specialized health care institutions, the medical and psychological treatment required by the next of kin who have been declared victims. The medical treatment for their physical health should be provided by personnel and institutions specializing in the care of the physical and mental health care problems of such people to ensure they are provided with the most appropriate and effective treatment. The psychological and/or psychiatric treatment should be provided by personnel and institutions specialized in caring for the victims of violent acts such as those that occurred in this case. This medical and psychological treatment must be provided for the necessary time, including the provision of the necessary medications, and should take into consideration the ailments of each of them, following an individual evaluation.144 136 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 425). 137 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 428). 138 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 428-432). 139 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 435). 140 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 436-437). 141 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 395). 142 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 396-397). 143 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs page 441). 144 Cf. Case of the Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 8, para. 302; Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, supra note 6, para. 449; and Case of Vargas-Areco v. Paraguay, supra note 6, para. 160.