Impact of War On Mental Health of Children and Adolescents

You might also like

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4

Levit S.V.

IMPACT OF WAR ON MENTAL HEALTH OF CHILDREN AND


ADOLESCENTS
Kharkiv National Medical University, Department of Hygiene and Ecology №1,
Kharkiv, Ukraine
Research advisor: Mokriakova M.I.

Introduction. The relevance of the research lies in the fact that traumatic experiences
during conflict profoundly affect emotional reactions, so restricting the adaptability
of children and adolescents, three-quarters of whom display signs of psychological
trauma. As a result, adaptability diminishes. The study's objective was to determine
how the conflict impacted the mental health of children and adolescents. When
communities are subjected to violent conflict, their mental health deteriorates
significantly. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression are the most
common mental diseases after battle, affecting up to a third of individuals exposed to
severe combat experiences [1].

A socio-ecological perspective is required to grasp the development of a kid in a war


or post-war situation. This perspective takes into account not only the direct
consequences of the conflict on the development of the individual kid, but also the
near and distant settings of the child, such as his or her family and community. [3]
Extreme poverty, a lack of resources for health care, a collapse of the educational
system, and rising rates of family and community violence are common risk factors
for contemporary conflicts, which virtually exclusively impact low-resource nations.
In addition, contemporary conflicts are often connected with a variety of other
ecological risk factors. Children are especially susceptible to the accumulation of
stressors; there is substantial evidence for a dose-response relationship between the
amount of stressors children experience and impairments in various areas of
adaptation, including mental and physical health, academic achievement, and social
relationships [4]. This shows that the more a child's exposure to stresses, the greater
the likelihood that they will have difficulty adjusting to their surroundings. Children
are particularly susceptible to the mounting stress resulting from such conditions.
Numerous studies reveal a dose-response association between children's stress levels
and their adaptability in various aspects of their life, including mental and physical
health, academic success, and social interactions [5]. This indicates that the chance of
a kid experiencing difficulties in these areas is related to the number of stressors to
which the child is exposed.

Families seem to have a significant role in the dynamic interplay between risk and
protective variables at different ecological levels. The underlying reason of the
increased prevalence of family violence against children may be conflict. In addition,
violence unconnected to either war or family issues may contribute to children's
psychopathology. This category comprises post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
depression, and internalizing and externalizing behavior issues.

After the conclusion of a war, one of the most important questions to ask is what
factors contribute to the "cycle of violence." The great bulk of past research has
focused on intergenerational effects, such as the potential mediation role of parental
trauma and psychopathology. This begs the issue of whether there is a correlation
between the increasing number of child abuse cases and the likelihood of getting
involved in a violent dispute.

Prior studies omitted an additional mechanism through which battle stress may
contribute to an increase in domestic violence. The child's exposure to war and the
accompanying psychopathology may raise the child's likelihood of experiencing
domestic violence in the future. Due to their traumatization, children raised in the
midst of a conflict are more prone to have serious behavioral difficulties. These
issues may include frustration, explosive rage, as well as internalizing and
externalizing symptoms. In the majority of cases, their mental health concerns are
accompanied by functional limitations that make it challenging for them to perform
well in school, fulfill their obligations at home, and engage in social activities. All of
these issues may make it more difficult for parents to handle their war-traumatized
children, and as a consequence, these parents may become more authoritative and
stern.

Materials and methods: The data for the study on the mental health of war-affected
children and adolescents came from a survey of parents of children aged 7 to 12 and
adolescents aged 13 to 17, as well as an examination of the relevant theory.

Results: More than 13% of the overall number of adolescents were more reclusive,
and 41% began experiencing anxious thoughts, according to the survey results. Sleep
difficulties are experienced by 29% of individuals who participated in the poll. 45%
of evaluated children experience emotional variations, sometimes known as "mood
swings."

Conclusion: We may conclude that there is a substantial risk of mental illness among
children and families who are leaving war zones or who are currently living in them.
This is because they are exposed to an accumulation of risk variables at different
socio-ecological levels. Parenting styles seem to have a significant role in the
psychological well-being of children in conflict environments as both a risk and a
buffer. In order to be successful, health care interventions for war-traumatized
communities must concentrate on both the individual and family levels. The second
method would assess and address any potential problems that may occur in the
parent-child connection. This has the potential to disrupt the vicious cycle of war
trauma, psychopathy, and dysfunctional family dynamics, including the maltreatment
of women and children. 

References:

1. Steel Z, Chey T, Silove D, et al., JAMA 302: 537-49, 2009.


2.  Bronfenbrenner U. The ecology of human development. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1979.
3.  Reed RV, Fazel M, Jones L et al. Lancet 2017;379:250‐65. 
4. Sriskandarajah V, Neuner F, Catani C. Soc Sci Med 2015;146:257‐65. 

You might also like