More than 1.3 million people in Ukraine hold the status of combatant. These figures are from September of last year, so the number may be higher today. Our young men and women with this status are veterans, and some of them have already returned to civilian life. It is precisely the return of service members to civilian life that requires society to have a deep understanding of how to communicate with those who have witnessed war firsthand. Communication with people who have experienced war directly impacts their sense of safety and belonging. An ethical approach helps prevent retraumatization and creates conditions for a sincere exchange of views. Oleksandr Chamosov, Chief Psychologist of the Ukrainian Veterans Fund’s Crisis and Legal Support Hotline, emphasizes the importance of basic skills in empathetic dialogue. Empathetic communication is self-respect that extends to those around you. You “filter” your thoughts and feelings, avoid destructive language, and develop a strategy for your personal safety as well as the safety of those around you. Thus, the main task in communicating with veterans is to create conditions in which a person with a military past feels like an equal participant in the conversation without any social pressure.
A neutral perception of status without emotional labels
The term “veteran” should be viewed strictly as a technical status. Stripping this word of its emotional connotations eliminates stereotypes regarding the age or behavior of the person being addressed. Society often labels former military personnel either as unbreakable heroes or as deeply traumatized individuals. Oleksandr Chamosov proposes the most pragmatic approach to understanding this phenomenon.
“A veteran is a person who has been to war, has been in combat, and who has returned and is now finding their place in civilian life,” notes the psychologist.
Labeling someone with post-traumatic stress disorder destroys trust. A person remains a full-fledged member of the community with their own unique life path.
Read also:
A Steel Touch Restores Movement: How Ukrainians Are Creating Affordable Finger Prosthetics
Prioritizing Consent and Setting Personal Boundaries
Discussing sensitive topics requires prior agreement. The conversation partner has the full right to set boundaries, refuse to answer certain questions, or stop the conversation at any time. The initiator of the conversation must ask for permission before delving into the details of military service.
“We agree on the terms beforehand. This applies to any communication, including communication with veterans,” explains Oleksandr Chamosorov.
Maintaining control over the veteran fosters a sense of security. Insisting on continuing an unpleasant topic for the sake of one’s own curiosity is a direct violation of privacy boundaries.
Refraining from Comparing Different Military Experiences
The human psyche tends to compare the level of pain endured or the difficulty of circumstances. Ethical interaction categorically precludes evaluating the military experiences of different people. Service at headquarters, being on the front lines, the loss of comrades, or a long recovery after a serious injury are equally significant experiences for each individual. Demeaning someone else’s experience hinders communication. The psychologist emphasizes the uniqueness of each story.
“Every person is unique in every way, with no analogies whatsoever; it is a unique experience. Therefore, once again, the answer is not to compare at all—to rule out this option of comparison for yourself,” the expert asserts.
Read also:
The Veteran PRO digital platform for veterans and their families has gone live in Ukraine
Taboos on trigger questions and invasions of personal space
Certain phrasings are guaranteed to cause discomfort or trigger a defensive reaction. Questions about the reasons for voluntary mobilization, killing enemies, or the minutiae of sustaining concussions constitute a gross invasion of personal space. Demands to specify the exact date of injury are perceived by the interlocutor as a sign of distrust in their words. Oleksandr Chamosov calls such questions invasive.
“This is a question whose answer I want to keep to myself, because I’m still answering that question for myself,” the expert shares from his own experience.
A reaction to social pressure may include aggression, a sudden change of subject, or withdrawal. The best way to show support is simply to thank the person for their trust and willingness to share their memories.
Focus on inner resources and plans for the future
The experience of war is just one stage in the formation of a person’s identity. Life after demobilization, the process of recovery, acquiring new professions, and new social achievements make up a huge part of one’s identity. Reducing a person’s story exclusively to their military past narrows the view of their life potential. A healthy dialogue always highlights the inner resources of the person you’re talking to.
“War is just one part of the experience. What matters to me is how I returned, how I reintegrated into society,” the psychologist emphasizes.
Mutual empathy, the ability to share a hearty laugh at a specific joke, or to accept complex emotions, make communication truly therapeutic for society as a whole.
Read also:
Rehabilitation in Ukraine after war trauma: the experience of Médecins Sans Frontières
