The question "to leave or to stay?" in wartime sounds as if there is a single correct answer somewhere that is guaranteed to relieve anxiety. However, as crisis psychologist, psychotherapist, Betobee platform specialist, and founder of the "Clinic of Happiness" psychological center in Warsaw Yulia Nosenko explains, in conditions of uncertainty it is impossible to make a decision that will completely eliminate fear. No one knows what will happen in a month, whether it will be possible to adapt abroad, and when the opportunity to return will arise. According to the expert, a person's task is not to guess the future or find an ideal option, but to make a sufficiently safe and manageable decision for today, based on real circumstances, personal resources, and health status.
Forced emigration as a traumatic experience
Yulia Nosenko emphasizes that forced emigration can be a severe traumatic experience. A person leaves not just a house or a city — they lose familiar routes, daily routines, a close social circle, their native language, understandable rules, and professional connections. In a new country, they have to figure out documents, housing, work, school for children, and medicine all over again, sometimes without knowing the language and without acquaintances nearby. This is often accompanied by responsibility for children, elderly parents, or other loved ones. Questions arise inside: "What if I fail?" and "What if we don't adapt?". And when relatives remain in Ukraine, a person may experience separation, feelings of powerlessness, and guilt for being safe themselves.
How chronic stress distorts perception
In a state of chronic stress, the psyche begins to hold onto any predictability. Even a place where it has long been dangerous and uncomfortable can seem more reliable than the unknown. In Ukraine, at least it is clear where the nearest shelter is, who to contact, how to get to work, and what to do after an air raid alert. Abroad, you will have to rebuild almost every part of your life from scratch. When the nervous system is in threat mode for a long time, attention narrows: it is harder to see multiple options, assess consequences, and endure new uncertainty. The body looks for a way to reduce tension — some freeze and postpone the decision, some leave abruptly after another shelling, and some direct their energy toward fighting.
Two extremes in making a choice
According to the specialist, there are two extremes in this choice. In one case, a person waits for years for the right moment and absolute certainty: "At least everything is familiar here, while out there is complete uncertainty." The psyche finds arguments in favor of the familiar option because certainty reduces anxiety, if only for a short time. In another case, the decision arises instantly after an event that can no longer be endured: an explosion near the house, a strike on a neighboring building, a threat to children or loved ones. In such a state, a quick departure can be a way to save a life, and panic in real danger does not make the decision wrong. The expert also notes: "I have often heard from clients: 'I'm already used to the war and shelling.' A person can indeed learn to perform necessary actions and react less sharply. However, prolonged stress continues to affect sleep, the body, concentration, mood, and the ability to make decisions. External calmness does not yet mean an internal sense of safety."
Moving does not complete the psychological process
Moving itself does not complete this process. Leaving physically and feeling safe psychologically are two different stages. Ahead lie the search for housing and work, legalization, the language barrier, loneliness, and building a new social circle. A person may already be in a safer place, but their nervous system still lives for a long time as if danger is near. After leaving, many continue to live in anticipation: "Any moment now everything will end, and I will go back home." They do not furnish housing, do not make plans, do not invest in a new life, remaining in a state of limbo between two realities.
How to separate facts from catastrophic forecasts
The psychologist explains that during wartime, one cannot tell a person that all their fears are made up, because the threat is real. At the same time, the brain can construct the worst scenarios and experience a possible event as if it has already happened. The thought "something might happen" turns into the certainty "this will definitely happen." Specific questions help separate facts, probabilities, and catastrophic forecasts: What is happening right now? What facts support my opinion? What other options are possible? What can I influence? According to Nosenko, such work does not deny the danger — it restores the ability to see the situation more broadly and make decisions based on reality rather than projections of fear.
