How to talk to your children about war when it dominates the news
When conflict fills the news cycle—from the war in Ukraine to the crisis in Gaza and escalating tensions across the Middle East—children notice. They overhear conversations, glimpse footage on screens, and absorb the anxiety of the adults around them. Even very young children who cannot articulate what they have seen may carry its emotional weight. As parents, you cannot shield your children from the existence of war, but you can profoundly shape how they process it.
Research consistently shows that how families talk about distressing world events matters more than whether children are exposed to them. Children whose parents engage in open, honest, age-appropriate conversations about conflict show fewer anxiety symptoms, greater emotional resilience, and a stronger sense of safety than those left to fill the silence with their own imaginations. As the Raising Children Network notes, "Children tend to make up what they don't know, which is often worse than reality."
This article draws on developmental psychology research, guidance from organisations including UNICEF, the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN), and the American Psychological Association (APA), alongside insights from cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and schema therapy, to offer a comprehensive, evidence-based guide for Australian parents navigating these difficult conversations.
Understanding children's reactions to war in the news
Children are not miniature adults. They process information about war and conflict through the lens of their developmental stage, temperament, and life experience. Understanding what is normal at each age helps parents respond with confidence rather than alarm.
Preschool children (ages 2–5)
Young children operate in what Piaget called the preoperational stage. Their thinking is concrete, egocentric, and infused with magical reasoning. Critically, preschoolers often cannot distinguish between what they see on a screen and what is happening nearby. The NCTSN warns that "very young children may not understand that the event is not happening in their community." A child watching footage of buildings being bombed may genuinely believe their own street is under attack.
Common reactions in this age group include regression to earlier behaviours—bedwetting, thumb-sucking, loss of previously acquired speech or toileting skills—as well as clinginess, separation anxiety, nightmares, and changes in play. Parents may notice themes of destruction or harm creeping into pretend play, or conversely, a worrying restriction in imaginative play altogether. Somatic complaints such as stomach aches and headaches, prolonged crying, aggression, and extreme temper tantrums are also well documented.
Research by Feldman and colleagues studying children in conflict-affected areas of Israel found that between 33 and 38 per cent of children aged 1.5 to 5 years exhibited partial or full PTSD symptoms. While these children had direct proximity to conflict, the findings underline a crucial point: preschoolers were once assumed to be too young to be affected. The evidence firmly contradicts this. In fact, their emotional immaturity and lack of autonomy may make them more vulnerable than older children during periods of heightened threat.
Primary school children (ages 6–11)
Children in this age range enter Piaget's concrete operational stage. They can think logically about concrete events, understand basic cause and effect, and grasp that other people have different thoughts and feelings. They know the news is real, which is precisely what makes it more frightening.
School-age children's reactions typically centre on safety and security—primarily for themselves and their loved ones. They ask direct questions: "Will the war come here?" "Could our house be bombed?" "Is Dad safe at work?" They may have difficulty sleeping, experience nightmares, struggle to concentrate at school, and develop somatic complaints. Some children become irritable or act out; others withdraw.
A landmark study by Pfefferbaum and colleagues at the University of Oklahoma found that television exposure to the Oklahoma City bombing was directly related to post-traumatic stress symptoms in over 2,000 middle school students, even among those with no physical or emotional connection to the event. Remarkably, this media-driven stress persisted two years later. School-age children can process factual information about conflict, but they tend to simplify complex situations into "good guys versus bad guys" frameworks. They benefit from concrete, factual explanations rather than abstract geopolitical analysis. Marsha Richardson of Penn GSE recommends responses like "They are fighting to work out who is in charge of the country" rather than lengthy political context.
Research also reveals consistent gender differences: girls report significantly higher levels of war-related anxiety, fear, and somatic complaints across studies spanning decades, from the Gulf War to recent Middle Eastern conflicts. This does not mean boys are unaffected—they may simply express distress differently, through externalising behaviours such as aggression or risk-taking.
Adolescents (ages 12–17)
Teenagers can grasp the full horror and implications of war. Their capacity for abstract reasoning, hypothetical thinking, and moral judgement means they grapple with questions of justice, complicity, mortality, and meaning. This is both a strength—enabling genuine empathy, critical analysis, and civic engagement—and a vulnerability.
Common reactions among adolescents include anger and moral outrage, existential anxiety, hopelessness about the future, social withdrawal, and in some cases, increased substance use. A longitudinal study of over 1,600 Israeli adolescents during ongoing conflict found associations between war exposure, psychiatric symptoms, and both digital media use and substance use as coping mechanisms. Adolescents in war-affected Donetsk, Ukraine, showed four times the odds of developing PTSD compared to peers in peaceful regions.
Yet adolescents also demonstrate remarkable capacity for resilience and agency. Gene Beresin of Massachusetts General Hospital's Clay Center observes that teen activism during times of conflict can support healthy development by fostering autonomy, group belonging, and a sense of purpose. "Their activism may remind us all what it means to have a voice," he notes. Identity development—the central task of adolescence according to Erikson—means that how teenagers engage with conflict can become incorporated into their emerging sense of self, for better or worse.
A particular concern in the current era is social media exposure. Research with Israeli adolescents aged 13–15 found that violent conflict-related content on social media influenced youth emotionally, physically, and cognitively. Mass distribution through algorithms, combined with adolescent curiosity and social pressure, drives vast exposure that parents may not be aware of.
Factors that shape a child's response
Beyond age, several factors moderate how intensely a child reacts to war news. Temperament plays a role—though not always in predictable ways. A study of children after 9/11 found that behaviourally inhibited (naturally cautious) children actually showed lower PTSD rates, suggesting their tendency to avoid distressing stimuli may be paradoxically protective. Children with strong self-regulation skills consistently fare better across all age groups.
Proximity matters, both geographic and psychological. Children with family connections to affected regions, refugee backgrounds, or prior trauma are at significantly heightened risk. The quality of parental mental health and family functioning is perhaps the most robust moderating factor. Research by Shoshani and Slone at Tel Aviv University found that maternal warmth and authoritative parenting functioned as protective factors, while maternal authoritarianism actually exacerbated the link between exposure and behavioural problems in children.
Principles for talking to children about war
The evidence converges on a clear set of principles. Every major child health organisation—UNICEF, the NCTSN, the APA, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and Save the Children—endorses the same core approach, adapted by age and context.
Being present, patient, and supportive
The single most important thing you can do is be available. Do not wait for your child to bring up the topic. Most school-age children and teenagers will have heard something—from peers, social media, or overheard adult conversations—and research shows that children who have open conversations with trusted adults experience less anxiety than those left to process alone.
Start by asking what they already know: "I'm wondering if you've heard anything about what's happening in the news." Listen more than you speak. Let their questions guide the conversation. Save the Children's Rebecca Smith emphasises that "ignoring or avoiding the topic of conflict can lead to children feeling lost, alone and scared."
For younger children, choose a quiet moment during an activity—drawing, walking, driving—rather than creating a formal, potentially intimidating sit-down conversation. Emerging Minds recommends avoiding bedtime for these discussions, as this can fuel nightmares and sleep difficulties. For teenagers, ask what their friends are saying and how they feel. This signals that your family talks openly about difficult things.
Be prepared for multiple conversations. As the situation evolves, children's questions and feelings will change too. The NCTSN advises planning for ongoing check-ins rather than treating this as a one-off discussion.
Offering honest, age-appropriate explanations
Honesty builds trust, and children can detect dishonesty. But honesty does not mean sharing graphic details or overwhelming a child with information beyond their developmental capacity.
For preschoolers, keep explanations concrete and brief: "Some people in another country are fighting and some people got hurt. People are helping them and looking after them." Avoid labels like "bad people" or "evil"—UNICEF recommends encouraging compassion instead, for instance by talking about families who have had to leave their homes.
For primary school children, you can offer more factual detail: "There is a war happening in a country far away from Australia. People are leaving their homes to find safe places, and many countries are sending help." Use maps to show distance. The APA suggests preparing yourself for questions your child may ask—"Could it happen here?" "Why are they fighting?"—and having calm, measured answers ready.
For teenagers, consider exploring news coverage together. Discuss the complexities of the situation, the difference between reliable and unreliable sources, and the role of propaganda. The British Psychological Society advises helping adolescents research the conflict together using maps, history, and reputable sources, noting that "all wars involve propaganda and difficult narratives, so try to maintain a balanced view."
It is perfectly acceptable—indeed important—to say "I don't know" when you genuinely do not have an answer. UNICEF explicitly encourages this: you can look it up together, or with older children, find answers as a team. This models intellectual humility and collaborative problem-solving.
Validating and normalising feelings
Children need to know that their emotional responses—fear, sadness, anger, confusion, even guilt—are normal and acceptable. Avoid phrases like "Don't worry" or "You're fine," which, though well-intentioned, dismiss the child's emotional experience and can teach them that their feelings are wrong or unwelcome.
Instead, name and validate: "It makes sense that you feel scared when you hear about this. A lot of people feel that way." This approach aligns with what neuroscientist Dr Daniel Siegel calls "name it to tame it." When a child consciously labels an emotion, neuroimaging research shows that the prefrontal cortex activates and sends calming signals to the amygdala, the brain's threat-detection centre. In practical terms, helping a child say "I feel frightened" genuinely reduces the intensity of their fear.
From a schema therapy perspective, validating emotions meets a child's core emotional need for acceptance and freedom to express feelings. When these needs are met, children develop adaptive beliefs—"My feelings are valid" and "I can cope with difficult emotions." When they are dismissed or ignored, children are at risk of developing early maladaptive schemas such as emotional deprivation or emotional inhibition, which can persist into adulthood.
It is also appropriate—and can be powerful—to share your own feelings in a measured way. The NCTSN notes that letting children know you are also affected can be an opportunity to share your values about how we treat others: "I feel sad when I see people being hurt. That's because I believe every person deserves to be safe."
Connecting behaviour to emotions
When children are distressed about world events, their feelings do not always emerge as clearly articulated worry. A preschooler's increased tantrums, a primary schooler's sudden reluctance to attend school, or a teenager's irritability and withdrawal may all be expressions of anxiety about war.
Gottman's research on emotional coaching provides a practical framework. First, be aware of the child's emotion, even when it is masked by behaviour. Second, recognise the behaviour as an opportunity for connection. Third, listen empathetically. Fourth, help the child label their feelings. Fifth, set limits while problem-solving together.
In CBT terms, children may develop cognitive distortions in response to war news. Catastrophising is the most common—"The war is coming here," "Everyone is going to die." Younger children are especially prone to emotional reasoning: "I feel scared, so I must be in danger." Gently helping children test these thoughts against evidence—"What makes you think that might happen? What do we know about how far away this is?"—can be enormously calming without dismissing their concerns.
The key is to connect before you redirect. Meet the child in their emotional experience first, then gently introduce perspective and coping strategies.
Reassuring safety and stability
Every organisation reviewed for this article emphasises the importance of reassuring children that they are safe—while being honest about the reality that some people are not. For Australian children with no direct connection to a conflict zone, you can be direct: "This is happening very far from us. You are safe, our family is safe, and people in our community are looking after each other."
For children with family connections to affected regions, honesty may mean acknowledging uncertainty: "We're worried about Grandma too. We're doing everything we can to stay in touch, and lots of people are working to help."
Maintaining routines is one of the most evidence-based strategies for restoring a child's sense of safety.Predictable meal times, bedtime rituals, school attendance, and extracurricular activities provide structure that counteracts the chaos children perceive in the wider world. The NCTSN, WHO, and UNICEF all specifically recommend keeping regular schedules as a protective factor during times of collective stress.
Emphasising helpers is another well-supported strategy: "There are doctors, nurses, aid workers, and people from many countries working to help the people who are affected." This shifts a child's attention from threat to response, from helplessness to human goodness.
Fostering resilience and agency
Resilience research is clear: resilience is not a fixed trait but a dynamic process shaped by relationships, skills, and opportunities. Harvard University's Center on the Developing Child identifies the presence of at least one loving, consistent, supportive adult as the single most common factor in children overcoming adversity. You are already providing that simply by having these conversations.
Beyond your relationship, fostering resilience means giving children a sense of agency. Helplessness amplifies distress; purposeful action reduces it. The NCTSN, APA, and Save the Children all recommend age-appropriate ways for children to contribute.
For younger children, this might mean drawing pictures or making cards for affected families, or donating pocket money to a humanitarian organisation. Primary school children might organise a school fundraiser, write letters, or learn about the experiences of refugees. Teenagers can engage with advocacy, volunteer with community organisations, or deepen their understanding of conflict resolution and international humanitarian efforts.
Save the Children's psychologist Ane Lemche notes that children who help feel "part of the solution instead of helpless." Importantly, also reassure children that it is not their problem to solve. They should not feel guilty about playing, seeing friends, or doing the things that bring them joy.
Managing children's access to war-related information
The evidence on media exposure is unequivocal
The research on media exposure and children's psychological wellbeing during times of conflict is remarkably consistent: more exposure correlates with more distress, following a clear dose-response pattern. This has been documented across the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the Gulf War, and recent Middle Eastern conflicts.
The landmark study by Schuster and colleagues, published in the New England Journal of Medicine after 9/11, found that among children whose parents did not limit television viewing, more TV was associated with significantly more stress symptoms. Children watched an average of three hours of 9/11 coverage. A separate study found that just five minutes of daily terrorism-related content rendered preschool children at risk for emotional reactivity, anxiety, sleep disturbance, and aggression.
In the social media era, these risks are amplified. Research by Holman and colleagues found that people who consumed six or more hours of media coverage of the Boston Marathon bombings experienced higher acute stress than those who were directly exposed to the event. Social media algorithms compound the problem by delivering repeated, algorithmically targeted content that children cannot easily escape.
Practical strategies for managing media exposure
For preschoolers, the guidance is straightforward: minimise exposure entirely. Switch off the news when young children are present. They gain nothing from watching war footage and are developmentally unable to process it safely.
For primary school children, limit exposure to age-appropriate news sources. In Australia, the ABC's Behind the News programme is specifically designed to present current events in a balanced, child-friendly format. The Raising Children Network recommends watching together, pausing to discuss, and explaining that rare, dramatic events are what make the news—they are not representative of everyday life. Avoid having news on repeat; children may interpret replayed footage as the event happening again and again.
For teenagers, total restriction is neither realistic nor desirable—but guidance is essential. Discuss how much time they spend consuming news and which sources they trust. Introduce the concept of platform literacy: help them understand how social media algorithms promote trending and emotionally provocative content, and how personalised feeds can create distorted perceptions of reality. Research from the Digital Poverty Alliance found that while 59 per cent of young people believed they could identify misinformation, over half mistakenly accepted a fabricated headline as true. Critical thinking skills need active cultivation.
Across all ages, be mindful of adult conversations children may overhear. Even infants and toddlers pick up on parental anxiety. The APA notes that expressing views about conflict in an angry, frightened, or hopeless tone may frighten children far more than the content itself. Senior APS psychologist Susie Bourke observes that "when stories are repeated over and over in the news, children are not able to have the perspective that these events aren't next door or repeatedly happening."
Model responsible media behaviour
Children learn by watching you. If you are doomscrolling on your phone, checking news obsessively, or reacting with visible distress to every update, your children will absorb that anxiety. UNICEF recommends identifying key times during the day to check the news rather than consuming it continuously. Model the behaviour you want your children to adopt: informed engagement balanced with deliberate disengagement.
Supporting children's mental health
Recognising signs of distress
It is normal for children to show some reaction to war in the news. Temporary worry, a few extra questions, brief sleep disruption, or seeking additional reassurance are all within the range of healthy responses and typically resolve within days to a couple of weeks with consistent parental support.
What warrants closer attention is distress that persists beyond two to four weeks, intensifies rather than improves, or significantly interferes with daily functioning. The specific signs vary by age:
In preschoolers, watch for persistent regression, separation anxiety that worsens rather than settles, nightmares most nights, repetitive and distressed play themes involving destruction or harm, or a significant change in eating patterns. In primary school children, red flags include ongoing physical complaints without medical explanation, school refusal, inability to concentrate, pronounced withdrawal from friends or activities they previously enjoyed, and reassurance-seeking that cannot be satisfied no matter how many times you respond. In teenagers, look for sustained withdrawal, sleep or appetite changes lasting more than a few weeks, expressions of hopelessness about the future, excessive media consumption (doomscrolling), angry outbursts disproportionate to the situation, or any mention of self-harm.
From a clinical perspective, the distinction between normal distress and a potentially clinical response lies in duration, intensity, and functional impairment. A child who is briefly upset but returns to their normal activities and relationships is coping. A child who remains preoccupied, avoidant, hypervigilant, or emotionally dysregulated weeks after the initial exposure may benefit from professional support.
Providing emotional and practical support
Parents serve as what attachment researchers call a secure base and safe haven—the foundational concepts of the Circle of Security model. During distressing times, children cycle between needing to explore and understand the world (secure base) and needing to return to the comfort and safety of their caregiver (safe haven). War news shifts the balance heavily toward the safe haven function: comfort, protection, and help organising overwhelming feelings.
Co-regulation is the primary mechanism through which parents support children's emotional wellbeing. Lauren Marchette at Harvard Medical School describes it as a "supportive, interactive, and dynamic process" through which caregivers help children learn to manage emotions. The neurobiological evidence confirms that when a caregiver is calm and attuned, they directly influence the child's stress-response system, helping to restore physiological balance. This is why the universal expert advice to "regulate yourself first" is not merely good practice—it is the physiological prerequisite for helping your child.
Practical co-regulation strategies include sitting close, offering physical comfort, using a warm and steady tone of voice, and narrating what you observe: "I can see your body is tense. Let's take some slow breaths together." For older children, grounding exercises can be valuable—the 5-4-3-2-1 sensory technique (name five things you can see, four you can hear, three you can touch, two you can smell, one you can taste) is simple, effective, and requires no special training. Deep belly breathing—"smell the flower, blow out the candle"—works well for younger children. Creative expression through drawing, writing, or clay work provides another outlet for processing emotions that may be too complex for words.
Fostering open communication over time
These conversations are not a single event but an ongoing practice. Check in regularly, especially when new developments occur in the news cycle. Keep the door open with low-pressure invitations: "I noticed there's been more news about the situation. How are you feeling about it?" Respect a child's right to decline the conversation—the NCTSN and Ukrainian child psychologist Nataliia Sosnovenko both emphasise that children "can have their own feelings, their own states, which they might not want to share." The goal is not to force discussion but to make clear that the space for it always exists.
For families with cultural or community connections to affected regions, additional considerations apply. headspace Australia has specifically acknowledged the impact of the Israel-Gaza conflict on Australian youth from Palestinian and Jewish communities, noting that rising antisemitism, Islamophobia, and anti-Palestinian sentiment compounds the distress of the conflict itself. If your child is experiencing discrimination or bullying related to a conflict, the NCTSN recommends discussing what they might face and even role-playing responses together.
When to seek professional help
If your child's distress persists beyond a few weeks, worsens over time, or interferes with their ability to attend school, maintain friendships, sleep, or engage in daily activities, it is time to seek professional support. Early intervention is critical. Research shows that untreated childhood anxiety predicts anxiety and depression in adulthood, impaired academic performance, and increased risk of substance use.
Your first step is your GP, who can provide a Mental Health Care Plan and refer you to a qualified child or adolescent psychologist. Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (TF-CBT) is the gold-standard, first-line treatment for childhood anxiety and trauma-related difficulties, supported by extensive evidence. Schema therapy-informed approaches can also be valuable, particularly for children who may be developing rigid beliefs about the world being fundamentally unsafe.
In Australia, you can access support through:
Your GP for a Mental Health Care Plan and referral
APS Find a Psychologist service: 1800 333 497
Kids Helpline: 1800 551 800 (24/7, for children and young people aged 5–25)
headspace: headspace.org.au (for young people aged 12–25)
Beyond Blue: 1300 224 636
Lifeline: 131 114
Emerging Minds (emergingminds.com.au), Australia's National Centre for Children's Mental Health, also offers excellent parent-facing resources, including fact sheets on talking to children about war and conflict, understanding anxiety in children, and supporting refugee and asylum-seeker children.
Conclusion
War in the news presents parents with one of the more confronting challenges of modern family life: how to be honest about a frightening world while preserving a child's sense of safety and hope. The evidence offers reassurance. You do not need to have perfect answers or to protect your child from every difficult image or conversation. What matters most is your presence, your willingness to listen, and your capacity to sit with difficult feelings alongside your child.
The research points to several insights worth holding close. Children are more aware than we often assume—even very young children absorb emotional cues from their environment. Silence does not protect them; it isolates them. Honest, developmentally attuned conversations reduce anxiety rather than increasing it. And the relationship between parent and child—warm, consistent, and emotionally available—remains the most powerful protective factor against psychological harm, whether the threat is near or far.
Perhaps most importantly, supporting your child through distressing world events is not just about managing a crisis. It is an opportunity to model the values you want them to carry forward: empathy, critical thinking, compassion for others, and the belief that even in the face of suffering, ordinary people have the power to help. These are not just coping strategies. They are the foundations of the kind of adults our children are becoming.