Conclusions

This study documents diverse experiences of coping with the loss of a loved one who served in the military during the Russian–Ukrainian war. The findings demonstrate that the experiences of relatives of fallen service members depend on a range of factors, including the year of death, place of residence, financial circumstances, the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Centers (TRC and SSC) and military units where the deceased served, as well as relationships with other close relatives of the deceased. The study indicates that people experience loss differently, have varying support needs, and relate differently to specific forms of assistance. Therefore, the individual dimension of grieving must be considered when designing support measures and policies. The study is based on the understanding that loss affects not only the families of fallen service members, but also other people in their close circle: friends, colleagues, and brothers- and sisters-in-arms. Accordingly, this report presents experiences of loss among people who held different roles in relation to fallen service members.

The study examined the main stages experienced by close relatives of fallen service members, beginning with the receipt of notification of death. In most cases, relatives learned about the death before receiving official notification from the TRC and SSC, often through brothers- and sisters-in-arms, military command, or medical personnel. The study findings indicate that the notification process was not always conducted appropriately, and that people encountered several problems at this stage. These included learning about the death through social media or news reports, as well as insufficient information about the next steps for relatives when the death was reported. Participants also noted a lack of access to medical and psychological support at the moment of notification.

Following notification, relatives of fallen service members faced the need to engage in multiple processes related to documentation, funeral arrangements, and other administrative tasks. They had to absorb large amounts of new information while being in a severe emotional state. This points to the absence of a unified, written action algorithm that would include a clear list of required steps and corresponding timelines.

The experiences of participants during the early stages—particularly during document processing and access to financial assistance—were more manageable when TRC and SSC staff or military units played an active role in providing information and consultations. Some participants reported positive experiences of interaction with TRC and SSC staff, who provided timely, comprehensive information and communicated respectfully. However, others encountered insensitive communication and incomplete information, especially in cases that were considered atypical at the time. Overall, the quality of interaction with TRC and SSC largely depended on the specific center and individual staff members involved.

Communication with the military unit played an important role during the initial period after the service member’s death, including support with funeral arrangements, farewell ceremonies, and information for relatives. In some cases, however, this communication occurred through informal contacts between the family and the deceased’s brothers- and sisters-in-arms, who often delivered personal belongings, provided emotional support, and assisted with organizing the farewell ceremony.

Many participants experienced financial difficulties in the initial period after the loss due to a range of factors, including delays in receiving state financial assistance, inability to work because of deteriorating health, the need for medical treatment, and funeral-related expenses. At the same time, many felt uncomfortable asking for financial help, making initiatives of support from others particularly important. During this period, families in need were financially supported by relatives and friends, the deceased’s brothers- and sisters-in-arms, colleagues and classmates, volunteers, local authorities, and civil society organizations.

The study indicated that some participants encountered incomplete and unsystematic information regarding the documentation required to obtain state financial assistance, the procedures and timelines for payments, and related issues. In addition, the process of receiving assistance was highly bureaucratic and, in some cases, required court proceedings (for example, for partners who were not in a legally registered marriage with the deceased). Some participants positively assessed financial support from local communities; however, overall analysis revealed that not all local authorities provided such support, or that the amounts varied significantly.

During the process of accessing benefits, participants sometimes faced a lack of detailed information and clear procedures. This forced them to search for information independently or seek clarification from other relatives of fallen service members. At the same time, some participants reported positive experiences with social protection departments and the Pension Fund, where they were informed about available benefits and social services. More problematic experiences were reported by participants whose relatives died before 2022; they described lengthy benefit application processes and insufficient awareness among public officials. Some of these relatives perceived this as unfair, particularly in comparison with the support available to families of service members who died after the start of the full-scale invasion.

The study found that not all relatives of fallen service members were sufficiently informed about the status of Family Member of a Fallen (Deceased) Defender of Ukraine. In particular, not everyone was informed about the purpose of obtaining this status, and some lacked a clearly defined algorithm of required steps. Support from military units, TRC and SSC, or other people in their close circle positively influenced the experience of obtaining the status. Difficulties were more common before the full-scale invasion, when responsible staff were not always aware of the proper procedures.

Reasons for seeking legal assistance included the need for support in obtaining the status of Family Member of a Fallen Defender of Ukraine, obtaining documents from military units, and initiating court proceedings. Some participants turned to courts to establish parenthood or in cases where pensions for families of fallen defenders were terminated. According to participants, interaction with the court system was complex, lengthy, and associated with significant financial costs due to the need to hire private lawyers.

Loss led to a sharp deterioration in the psychological well-being of participants, especially in the first days after receiving the news and during funeral preparations. These changes often resulted in worsening physical health, including the exacerbation of chronic illnesses, general health decline, and problems with sleep and eating. Informants who were pregnant at the time of notification reported that severe stress negatively affected their children’s health, resulting in the need for medical treatment.

The study identified a range of actions and coping strategies that helped participants manage stress. In the initial period after the loss, some immersed themselves in work, education, volunteering, or caring for others. Over time, participants found support in commemorating the deceased, engaging in volunteer activities, work and hobbies, and social interaction.

Ongoing support from friends, relatives, and others was crucial. This support took various forms, including regular communication, spending time together to avoid isolation, and assistance with everyday tasks. Some participants found it helpful to communicate with other relatives of fallen service members through associations, social media chats, or support groups. However, this was not a universal need, and some did not wish to participate in such groups. Participants also reported support from civil society organizations, foundations, and religious institutions, which provided material assistance, psychological support, organized trips, and involved families in their activities.

Most participants needed psychological support at some point after the loss, although not all sought it. Barriers included the absence of psychological services in their locality, lack of information about available services, and feelings of shame. Those who did seek professional help reported a range of problems, including a shortage of specialists experienced in working with military families and grief, unprofessional conduct by some practitioners, and limited availability of services in different formats (online and offline). These experiences sometimes led to a loss of trust in psychological professionals.

Some participants reported that in the period immediately following the loss, they were unable to continue daily activities, lost the capacity for social interaction and other forms of activity, and experienced uncertainty about their desires and future. Some were forced to leave their jobs to avoid excessive attention, pity, or judgment from colleagues. Brothers- and sisters-in-arms of fallen service members noted that they often had little opportunity to grieve due to ongoing hostilities. Returning to active life after a loss could take from several months to much longer. For some, motivation for recovery was rooted in the memory of the deceased and the desire to continue their work. Volunteering and civic engagement also helped participants cope.

The greatest support was provided by immediate loved ones, who monitored basic needs such as eating, sleep, and outdoor activity; helped redirect attention away from constant thoughts of loss; and provided financial assistance during the initial period. However, not everyone had sufficient support, as close relatives were sometimes unable to support one another due to their own psychological distress. Some participants lacked close contact with other relatives of the deceased and felt isolated from friends who avoided communication out of fear of retraumatization.

Some participants intentionally limited their social interactions and distanced themselves from acquaintances to avoid discussing the loss and their condition. Most did not feel deprived of social life but rather chose to remain outside it for personal comfort. While some gradually resumed communication with ease, others worried about how they would be perceived by others. The study also documented cases where the words or actions of others caused distress or retraumatization. Such experiences occurred during interactions with public institutions and service providers, as well as in personal communication with acquaintances and incidental encounters with strangers.

According to participants, in many cases TRC and SSC and military units organized funerals and farewell ceremonies. Local authorities played an important role in these processes, as did friends and the deceased’s brothers- and sisters-in-arms, who provided emotional and organizational support. Burial sites and details were usually agreed upon with the family, although not all relatives were sufficiently informed about military burial rituals.

Participants described various personal rituals and practices of remembrance, such as visiting graves, creating memorial spaces at home, or performing symbolic acts in honor of the deceased. For most, collective remembrance with other people in their close circle—meeting, sharing memories, and visiting the cemetery—was particularly important.

Public commemoration practices—such as memorial alleys, monuments, memorials, and street renaming—were significant for participants. Local authorities played a key role in organizing such commemorative spaces and events, including meetings with families of fallen service members. Experiences varied depending on the level of engagement of local authorities. Participants who lost relatives before 2022 reported that their loved ones were sometimes not mentioned or represented in memorial events or spaces, which they perceived as unfair.

A cross-cutting issue identified by participants was the low level of societal engagement in commemorative practices. Some felt that such events were primarily oriented toward families of the fallen. Participants expressed a desire for broader public participation in farewells, the national minute of silence, and other remembrance activities. Beyond rituals, some emphasized that honoring memory should also involve active contributions, such as rebuilding the country, supporting the military and their families, and participating in fundraising efforts.

Recommendations

Based on the identified needs and challenges, the following recommendations were developed:

  1. Introduce a nationwide information campaign that includes:
    • Information on grief and the experience of loss;
    • Guidance on communicating with and supporting people who are grieving, emphasizing diverse needs and experiences;
    • Attention to the fact that loss affects not only families but also other loved ones and people in one’s close circle;
    • Measures to address differences in perceptions of families who lost relatives before and after the full-scale invasion.

The campaign should use diverse formats and channels (online and print, television, radio, newspapers, brochures) to ensure broad accessibility.

  1. Improve the notification system of death, including:
    • Assessing and strengthening TRC and SSC resources for official notifications;
    • Ensuring the presence of medical personnel and access to first psychological aid during notifications;
    • Informing society and the military about the harm caused by unofficial notifications via social media;
    • Providing timely official notifications and printed guidance on next steps, including legal contacts.
  2. Enhance information and consultation mechanisms, including:
    • Developing and regularly updating materials on benefits, payments, services, procedures, and institutional contacts;
    • Creating a unified online portal and printed materials;
    • Systematizing algorithms for atypical cases;
    • Introducing appointment systems for public institutions;
    • Conducting training for staff on sensitive communication and retraumatization prevention.
  3. Reform financial support, benefits, and legal aid systems, including:
    • Ensuring timely initial payments;
    • Transparent communication about financial assistance;
    • Equal access to benefits regardless of the date of death;
    • Expanding free legal aid;
    • Introducing DNA collection upon enlistment to simplify parenthood verification.
  4. Strengthen workplace-based support, including:
    • Guidance for employers on ethical interaction;
    • Tools to support grieving employees;
    • Employer-funded psychological support;
    • Flexible leave policies tailored to individual needs.
  5. Expand psychological and social support, including:
    • Psychological assistance at the moment of notification;
    • Information on free and paid services;
    • Expanded community and state capacity for diverse formats of support;
    • Mechanisms to ensure basic needs;
    • Development of social housing options;
    • Support for community-based interaction among relatives.
  6. Develop a culture of remembrance and regulate public commemoration, including:
    • Promoting participation in commemorative events;
    • Transparent decision-making on memorial initiatives;
    • Public education on military burial rituals;
    • Involving families in planning ceremonies;
    • Inviting not only parents but also other people in the deceased’s close circle to award ceremonies.