Soldiers are talking more and more openly about their stress, anxiety and trauma. They are beginning to seek help, also from psychologists. A session with a therapist is no longer something to be ashamed of, and the military is learning to take care of its personnel’s mental health.

This change did not happen overnight, but it is quite noticeable – the soldiers’ contact with psychologists has ceased to be a taboo subject and has instead become a natural element of self-care. There are very specific reasons behind this important shift in priorities that for years had been unimaginable inside the barracks.

“In 2019, when I started work, the situation was quite different,” recalls 2ndLt Sylwia Biardzka, psychologist with the 18th Mechanized Division. “The soldiers were apprehensive about seeing a psychologist, let alone a psychiatrist. The changes came with the pandemic. Isolation, separation from family – these were very difficult experiences for many of them. At the time, my job was to call soldiers and ask how they were doing, feeling, what they needed. And it turned out that our conversations were important to them. Then came the war in Ukraine and even the most experienced soldiers began to ask me if it was normal that, having worked in the army for 20 years, they were afraid of what might happen. It was normal, obviously, but the diagnosis had to be voiced. The relief it brought encouraged them to reach out to a psychologist,” adds the specialist.

What happened in the army is not an isolated incident. In recent years, the attitude to mental health has changed in the entire society. Seeking help from a psychologist or a psychiatrist is no longer perceived as weakness, which is confirmed by figures: the number of visits at specialist offices is dynamically growing (by over 60% year-over-year in 2024), and about 20% of Polish adults declare to have undergone therapy. Soldiers do not operate in a vacuum – they also have families, children, friends who struggle with their own problems, seek support, therapy. They also see the results of not receiving help – in stories of violence, breakdowns, tragedy, which make their way into the public domain. A psychologist is no longer someone who fixes “problems we don’t admit to having,” and has become someone who helps with “issues that must be addressed.”

Military personnel has an additional baggage of experiences. Missions in Iraq and Afghanistan put enormous psychological strain on soldiers. There is no comprehensive data on this subject, but it is estimated that as a result of these experiences, at least several hundred veterans have suffered from PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder], a number which could not be ignored by the army. Even without a war, however, military service involves significant stress and cannot function without a system of psychological care – a system faced with new challenges due to the war in Ukraine, which shows that mental resilience is becoming one of the key elements of combat readiness.

Active Presence

The changes that have taken place in the field of psychological care extend beyond the fact that soldiers started to seek help more often. They can also be seen in the role that psychologists play within the unit. Until recently associated mainly with crisis situations, today they increasingly function as a presence in the daily life of the unit. “We’re in this environment together with the soldiers,” says Anna Chacewicz, a psychologist with the 1st Armored Brigade. “It’s not like we see each other once a week in an office, in some separated space. Soldiers just walk up to me and start a conversation. Sometimes it’s just a casual »how are you,« and other times it’s something more serious. The line is fluid, but that’s exactly why this kind of contact can happen in the first place. If we were just people »for solving problems,« many of the soldiers would never reach out to us,” emphasizes the specialist.

This presence is not limited to waiting for a soldier’s knock on the door. More and more often, it means literally going out to meet them. “I’ve made an agreement with the commander that once a week I’ll visit the subunits to check in on the troops,” says Marcin Tymoszuk, a psychologist with the 18th Reconnaissance Battalion. “That way, they know that I’m there, that they can come to me, and they actually do – not because they have to, but because we’ve met before, talked, developed some kind of a relationship.” In this model, the psychologist sees soldiers not only when they have a problem, but also in their day-to-day lives, and thus can pick up on things that are easily overlooked in a traditional, office-based relationship: mood swings, growing tension or withdrawal – signs that are not yet a cause for formal intervention but may be the first indication that something is happening. “Someone starts talking less, becomes more edgy, avoids people. When we’re on site, we can react before the problem escalates. The worst thing to do is wait for someone to say they’re struggling, because very often they won’t,” emphasizes Tymoszuk.

Self-reliance Culture

Unfortunately, right behind this visible change – a growing openness to working with a psychologist – there is a counterforce: barriers that prevent many soldiers from seeking help. Not because they do not need it, but because they are unable to acknowledge that need. This conflict between availability and lack of readiness is well described by specialists working with veterans. “Support begins in another person,” emphasizes Col Jarosław Świstak, PhD, from the Foreign Missions Veterans Treatment Center at the Military Institute of Medicine – National Research Institute [WIM – PIB]. “But for that to happen, someone has to take the first step,” he said during a meeting of the parliamentary committee on veterans’ affairs held in mid-April. For many, taking that first step can be difficult, partly due to a strong culture of self-reliance that instills the belief that everyone must manage on their own and that asking for help is a last resort. In the context of military service, such an attitude is natural, even necessary. “Independence, resilience, and the ability to perform under pressure are fundamental values in the military,” points out Justyna Klingemann, PhD, a sociologist of health and medicine at WIM – PIB. “The problem arises when these same traits begin to work against a person, making it difficult for them to recognize their own limitations and accept help.”

“The social context does not help – in Poland, despite ongoing cultural changes, the belief that mental health issues are something to be ashamed of still remains widespread. “For example, addiction is viewed not as a serious illness that involves immense suffering and requires support, but as something to be stigmatized, a sign of weakness,” says Justyna Klingemann. In a military environment, where evaluation, trust, and position in the group are important, such stigmatization can have particularly severe consequences. It carries a real risk of losing credibility – in the eyes of superiors, fellow soldiers, and often in own self-assessment. “On top of this there are the cultural norms of traditionally understood masculinity,” adds Klingemann. “According to these norms, a man must be tough, not show weakness, not talk about emotions, and not bother others with his problems. This mindset is deeply rooted, both in military culture and in society in general. Meanwhile, expressing your feelings is, after all, also an act of courage.”

As a result of these common perceptions, people downplay their symptoms and put off discussing them or reaching out for help. “Men are less likely to talk about their problems or seek help,” says Klingemann. “They try to cope on their own, with alcohol or other psychoactive substances becoming ways to regulate stress and anxiety.” In such circumstances, the decision to reach out for help is not made when the problem first arises, but only when it can no longer be hidden – from oneself and others.

This mechanism of postponing, negating, attempting to cope alone is clearly seen in the stories of veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. Piotr Kurpas returned from the second rotation of the Polish Contingent in Iraq having taken part in patrols and convoys, and carrying with him the memory of a suicide attack on the base in Hillah. The sight of human remains mixed with fragments of a wrecked car bomb had particularly etched itself into his memory. For a long time, Kurpas could not put a name to what he was feeling. He simply began to avoid crowded places and unpaved roads, sticking only to well-known routes.

Tension had been building up inside him for weeks, until a single spark was enough to trigger an outburst. Alcohol became his escape from the whirlwind of thoughts. His loved ones told him he was drinking too much, but for a long time he refused to acknowledge it. “I refused to budge, I put on a tough-guy facade,” he admits. “It wasn’t until my partner, who kept nagging me relentlessly, persuaded me to see a psychologist.”

The key role of loved ones, who are the first to notice a change, is also illustrated by another veteran story. “My husband said everything was fine, that he was coping. But I noticed that he was tossing and turning at night, having nightmares, and reaching for alcohol during the day,” says Aneta Cichosz, whose husband is a veteran of the third rotation of the Polish Contingent in Iraq. Joanna Szymańska, whose partner has served on three missions in total, recalls his trembling hands. “It would happen when my husband got upset. He hadn’t had symptoms like that before.”

After returning from Afghanistan, Szymon Mutwicki found himself alone – his wife had left to work abroad. Meanwhile, he brought home a burden of unwanted emotions. “It began on August 14, 2007, during a patrol in which Captain Łukasz Kurowski was killed,” he recalls. “I could have returned home immediately after that incident, but I stayed; I felt I needed to finish the mission,” he says. He began to regret that decision the very next day. “I was overcome by panic,” he recounts. “Every passing car looked like a suicide bomber vehicle, every person on the road was a threat. For a month, I slept for two or three hours a day.” Things were no better back home, but on a shelf in a small shop near his house sat “the most accessible antidepressant,” as Szymon calls alcohol. For two months, he drank himself into unconsciousness and woke up with a double hangover. “The moral one was probably worse than the physical one,” he says. One Friday, he stood in front of the mirror – unshaven, in the sweatpants he had worn since Monday – and for the first time, he thought he needed help. “I went to a psychiatrist who told me that I wouldn’t be able to cope on my own.”

Element of Service

Certain psychological mechanisms account for what we observe in the stories of veterans. It is not just about difficult memories, but about the way the body reacts to extreme experiences. “Simply put, the brain doesn’t know that the threat is over,” explains Bartosz Cichocki, a friend and volunteer of the Sprzymierzeni z GROM Foundation. “It still functions as if the threat was ongoing. It remains in a constant state of readiness, reacting faster and more intensely. However, what was necessary in a dangerous situation begins to interfere upon returning to everyday life,” explains Cichocki, who, as a psychologist, provides counseling to the Foundation’s beneficiaries, including veterans. The symptoms that emerge are difficult for many soldiers to understand. Problems with sleep, irritability, outbursts of anger, avoiding people or places that might trigger memories. “All it takes is a stimulus – a sound, a smell, a situation – and they are transported back to a traumatic moment,” says our interviewee. “Sometimes for just a split second, sometimes for longer.”

Meanwhile, according to specialists, not every reaction to a traumatic experience must end in developing PTSD. “The mere fact of experiencing a threatening situation does not necessarily lead to PTSD,” observes Małgorzata Rymkiewicz, a psychologist who until recently worked in the military and is now cooperating with the police. “A lot depends on what resources a person has, what support they receive, and under what conditions they return to normal functioning.” This is an important point, which shows that PTSD is not an experience exclusive to soldiers or mission participants. It can affect anyone who has been in a situation of extreme stress – victims of violence or disasters.

However, there are groups that, due to the nature of their work, are particularly exposed to such experiences. “Soldiers are one such group.” emphasizes 2ndLt Sylwia Biardzka. “And not just in the context of combat missions. Border patrol duty is another situation that involves long-term stress and an increased risk of injury or even death. We also have experiences from the time of the pandemic, during which soldiers supported medical and emergency services. They entered places where there were victims. For many, it was the first encounter with death. »What’s going on?!« they asked. »There’s no war, and so many people are dying.« It was a huge shock.” As Biardzka points out, such experiences are often not immediately recognized as something that could have long-lasting consequences. “It’s not like someone comes out of such a situation and says, »This has changed me.« The emotions build up in the mind. They resurface in dreams, in reactions to various situations. And only over time do they become a serious problem.” In this sense, PTSD is not a nightmare from the past, linked exclusively to missions in Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a genuine part of modern military service – also service not directly related to war.

Complementary System

Nevertheless, it was the experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan that became a turning point for the Polish Army in its approach to mental health. Although a psychological care system had existed previously, it focused on selecting soldiers for military service and intervening in crisis situations. The foreign missions prompted the development of specialized centers and the introduction of support procedures for soldiers returning from war. Among newly established institutions were the Clinic of Psychiatry, Combat Stress, and Psychotraumatology, as well as the Center of Foreign Missions Veterans. PTSD ceased to be a taboo subject and became a very real challenge the army had to face – not only in medical, but also in organizational and social terms.

“The problem of post-traumatic stress has always been present in the military,” points out BrigGen (Ret) Grzegorz Kaliciak, PhD, an experienced veteran of missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. “We used to call it trench sickness or simply cowardice. The latter, in particular, influenced the perception of soldiers suffering from it. But in just a few years, we’ve gone from stigmatizing people affected by trauma to treating them. It was a fundamental change.”

However, the day-to-day reality of psychological care for soldiers has much less to do with clinical environments and much more to do with what happens within military units, where certain trends remain unchanged. Two types of specialists work with soldiers: military psychologists and civilians employed by the Ministry of National Defense. In practice, there is a difference between talking to an officer and talking to a civilian. From a formal perspective, the distinction is clear. A psychologist in uniform is part of the command structure – they participate in exercises, visit training grounds, and operate on the same schedule as the soldiers. A civilian psychologist works in a manner similar to that of a private practice, with limitations related to working hours, for example. But the real significance of this difference only becomes apparent in the soldier-therapist relationship.

2ndLt Sylwia Biardzka admits that some soldiers are intimidated by the military psychologist. “One soldier had a very serious family problem. He was encouraged to come and see me, but he was afraid and went to a civilian specialist instead," she explains. The reason behind this decision was simple: “He thought that whatever he told me, I would pass on to his commander.” These fears were unfounded – regardless of their status, all psychologists are bound by the same professional confidentiality rules. Nevertheless, this mechanism often makes a civilian psychologist the first choice. From the soldier’s perspective, the conversation takes place outside the structure of official hierarchies and evaluations, which many find crucial, especially when the issue concerns their private life, relationship, or family situation.

This observation is also confirmed by MajGen (Res) Arkadiusz Szkutnik, former commander of the 18th Mechanized Division: “Soldiers visit civilian psychologists more often and more willingly. They find it easier to share their family issues and their worries with civilian specialists.” However, this type of relationship also has its limitations. For instance, psychologists in uniform have better knowledge of military life, understand that conditions on the training ground are tough, and may even have participated in missions,” adds Szkutnik. This is precisely what makes this model so effective. Overall, we have a complementary system in which the choice of psychologist depends on the nature of the problem and the soldier’s individual preferences. In some situations, the key thing is military experience and knowledge of the realities of service; in others, distance and a sense of greater independence is more important.

Backpack of Competencies

Today, however, the key question is no longer just how to respond to problems, but also how to prevent them. The system of psychological care in the military must prepare soldiers for an experience that has been unknown in Poland in recent decades – a full-scale war. The lessons learned from the conflict in Ukraine, which has been ongoing since 2022, are clear: the scale and intensity of the psychological strain faced by the soldiers is incomparable to the experiences of foreign missions. Constant threat, prolonged exposure to stress, the absence of safe zones, and limited rotation make mental resilience one of the key elements of combat effectiveness.

In practice, this means it is necessary to operate on two levels simultaneously. On the one hand, as Gen Arkadiusz Szkutnik emphasizes, training must acclimate soldiers as realistically as possible to the conditions in which they will operate: sleep deprivation, prolonged tension, fear, and a sense of uncertainty that do not disappear after a few hours but last for weeks. Without such experience, it is difficult to speak of real preparation for war.

On the other hand, simply being immersed in stress is not enough. Increasing emphasis must be placed on ensuring that soldiers not only endure the strain but also understand what is happening to them and are able to respond to it. “We can’t prepare them for everything, but we can give them appropriate tools,” says Anna Chacewicz. In this context, psychologists speak of building a “backpack of competencies” – a set of skills that would allow soldiers to cope with tension during and after operations. They are fundamental issues, yet often overlooked in traditional training, such as recognizing reactions to stress, the ability to regulate them, working with the breath, concentration, and tension. However, there is also something more difficult – the ability to recognize the moment when your own resources are no longer sufficient.

That is why, according to BrigGen Rafał Miernik, PhD, Chief of the Training Directorate (P7) of the General Staff of the Polish Armed Forces, increasing the number of psychologists is not enough. The change within the military must involve building a culture of mental well-being, understood as an integral part of daily life, rather than a reaction to a crisis. In his view, the approach should resemble the one employed in physical training: just as soldiers learn to maintain their physical fitness, they also need to learn how to take care of their mental health. This means introducing systematic practices into training – ranging from recovery and rest, through conscious stress management, to rebuilding the ability to function after intense mental strain. In wartime, the issue is not whether a soldier will be exposed to stress, but whether he will know how to handle it.

Multi-layered System

Psychological care in the military is a comprehensive system that encompasses everything from candidate selection to support for soldiers and their families at every stage of service.

The system consists of three components: selection psychology, support within units, and the healthcare system. They are described by LtCol Izabela Tomaszewska from the Psychology Division of the MoND’s Military Health Service Department.

The first component operates within military recruitment centers and focuses on evaluating candidates for service. In 2025, 226 psychologists worked in this area, conducting over 82,000 preliminary examinations and nearly 7,500 appeal examinations. In over 3,000 cases, decisions regarding unfitness for service were upheld. “This is the first and very important filter in the system,” emphasizes Tomaszewska, indicating that its purpose is not only to assess aptitude for service but also to limit the risk of enlisting individuals who are particularly susceptible to mental stress.

The second component are psychologists working in military units – there are currently 278 of them. As Tomaszewska points out, their role is not limited to responding to crises. “It also involves ongoing support, education, and prevention.” In 2025, in-unit psychologists conducted over 3,500 preventive classes and approximately 120,000 individual consultations.

The third pillar is the healthcare system, based on military medical facilities. They employ 187 psychologists and 121 psychiatrists (including 13 military psychiatrists). In 2025, approximately 112,000 psychiatric and psychological services were provided there – nearly 90% were outpatient services. “However, this number also includes civilian patients receiving care at military facilities,” notes Tomaszewska. All soldiers and their families are also entitled to use the general healthcare system, including psychiatric care.

In addition to these three core pillars of the system, there are supplementary measures. One of them is a 24/7 helpline for soldiers (800 300 311). According to data from the Ministry, the number of calls remains stable at 300–340 per year. The calls result in intervention just in a handful of cases – there were five such situations in 2024 and seven in 2025. Although the scale does not seem large, this tool serves an important function: it allows for contact in an emergency, outside the unit’s structure and without the need to formally request assistance. The psychological care system also extends to soldiers’ families. Last year, they received approximately 1,000 psychological consultations. As the interviewees emphasize, this is an important element of a comprehensive approach to mental health – the problems soldiers face often have their roots or consequences in their private lives. Support directed at family members is therefore not only intended to help but also to prevent.

An important group included in the system are foreign missions veterans. In their case, support is provided both at military medical facilities, where over 7,000 consultations were provided in 2025, and at military units (approximately 400 such meetings). In addition, there are therapeutic and preventive health retreats organized by military spa and rehabilitation hospitals. Last year, approximately 6,000 people, both soldiers and their family members, took advantage of this offer.

Importantly, access to detailed data on psychological care remains limited. This is due to several factors, explains Col Arkadiusz Kosowski, MD, PhD, Director of the Military Medical Service Department at the Ministry of National Defense. First, access to both psychologists at military units and those at military clinics and hospitals is supplemented by treatment offered through the public and private healthcare systems. This allows patients to access a full range of services and receive support from specialists with whom they wish to work. However, this creates difficulties in obtaining a complete picture of the situation. On top of that, not all cases are formally diagnosed or reported, which is characteristic of mental health issues in the civilian sector as well. Another important aspect emphasized by Arkadiusz Kosowski is that “knowledge of soldiers’ health is a matter of national security." For this reason, detailed data on the scale of mental health issues in the armed forces are not and will not be fully disclosed to the public.

Justyna Klingemann, PhD, Head of the Research Unit for Systems Analysis and Interdisciplinary Mental Health Studies at the Clinic of Psychiatry, Combat Stress, and Psychotraumatology of the Military Institute of Medicine – National Research Institute (WIM – PIB):

“Discussions about soldiers’ mental resilience often touch upon the extremely important issue of training, which shapes their ability to support one another and equips them with tools for coping with stress. Less often mentioned is the culture of gratitude. What is that? It is not about isolated gestures or declarations, but rather about the way the entire system functions. A culture of gratitude is a set of practices that ensure that service is noticed, acknowledged, and socially recognized. It encompasses three interrelated dimensions and is co-created by the state, commanders, and the social environment.

The first is the everyday dimension – language, relations, and the way we talk about service. It is shaped primarily within units by superiors and colleagues. We must emphasize its meaning and the responsibility that comes with it. The second dimension is symbolic in nature and concerns rituals, commemorations, and holidays that build collective memory. These events are meaningful when they engage people emotionally, rather than being merely a formal gesture. The third is the institutional dimension, which encompasses specific actions: care for soldiers embedded in the system, access to psychological care, support for families, and a system of assistance for veterans.

The combination of these elements influences mental resilience and, consequently, the army’s combat readiness. It is not just an individual trait, but the result of relationships, support, and the meaning that a person attributes to their service. And social recognition reinforces that sense of purpose. From this perspective, a culture of gratitude is not an addition, but one of the factors influencing the morale and performance of soldiers in conditions of prolonged stress.”

Marcin Tymoszuk, psychologist with the 18th Reconnaissance Battalion:

“I’ve made an agreement with the commander that once a week I’ll visit the subunits to check in on the troops. That way, they know that I’m there, that they can come to me, and they actually do – not because they have to, but because we’ve met before, talked, developed some kind of a relationship.”

Anna Chacewicz, psychologist with the 1st Armored Brigade:

“It’s not like we see each other once a week in an office, in some separated space. Soldiers just walk up to me and start a conversation. Sometimes it’s just a casual »how are you,« and other times it’s something more serious. The line is fluid, but that’s exactly why this kind of contact can happen in the first place. If we were just people »for solving problems,« many of the soldiers would never reach out to us.”

If you are struggling in your daily life, if you are experiencing a mental health crisis and need support, please call one of the numbers listed below:
800 300 311 – psychological support hotline at the Ministry of National Defense
261 842 078 – psychological assistance at the Center of Foreign Missions Veterans
116 123 – free helpline for adults
116 111 – helpline for children and teenagers
800 70 2222 – support center for people experiencing a mental health crisis