New research presented to an Oireachtas committee has highlighted deep concerns about mental health support in Ireland’s Defence Forces. The study found that 94 per cent of surveyed personnel believed disclosing a mental health difficulty could damage their military careers, while only 22 per cent said they would disclose such a problem to seek medical support.
Key findings from the Defence Forces mental health study
The research was presented to the Oireachtas defence committee on Thursday, October 22nd, 2026. It was conducted by Dan Fitzpatrick, a former Defence Forces member who served for more than 22 years, and involved 687 serving personnel from the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps.
According to the findings, many respondents viewed disclosure as a potential professional risk, even when they recognised that treatment could be beneficial. The study described this as a serious organisational contradiction: personnel are encouraged to seek help, but may believe that doing so could affect their future in the Defence Forces.
- 94 per cent believed revealing a mental health difficulty could negatively affect their career.
- 22 per cent said they would disclose a difficulty to obtain medical support.
- 34 per cent reported having experienced suicidal thoughts.
- 10 per cent reported previous self-harm.
- 25 per cent screened positive for probable post-traumatic stress disorder.
- 61 respondents, or 9 per cent, reported a previous suicide attempt.
The survey was carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic and was published this year. The findings therefore reflect a specific period, but they have prompted wider questions about trust, confidentiality and medical classification within the military.
Why personnel may be reluctant to seek support
Fitzpatrick told committee members that the Defence Forces’ medical grading system was among the biggest barriers to seeking help. He said personnel can receive an automatic downgrade after presenting with a mental health issue.
A lower medical classification can prevent members from serving overseas and, in some circumstances, may contribute to their removal from the organisation. Fitzpatrick did not call for the system to be abolished. Instead, he argued that restrictions should be proportionate, reviewed regularly and connected to an individual’s recovery.
The concern raised by the research is that a person may recognise psychological distress and understand the value of treatment, yet still decide not to seek help because of the perceived consequences. That dynamic could make serious problems harder to identify and address.
Defence Forces disputes the level of reluctance
Colm Ó Luasa, the Defence Forces deputy chief of staff support, said he did not recognise the level of reluctance described in the research. Responding to questions from Independent Senator Tom Clonan, a former Defence Forces member, he said the 94 per cent figure did not match his experience of the organisation.
Ó Luasa said stigma was not unique to the Defence Forces but reflected a wider societal issue. He added that the organisation was working to reduce stigma through mental health education and training based on internationally recognised best practice.
He said the Defence Forces recognised the importance of addressing stigma, while making clear that he did not accept the study’s conclusion that such a high proportion of personnel were reluctant to seek support.
Medical classification described as non-punitive
David Lyons, who leads Defence Forces personnel support services, said he had contacted Fitzpatrick about the research. He indicated that some of the information could help inform future policy.
Dr Iseult Coolahan, head of clinical delivery, told the committee that medical classification was not intended to punish personnel. She said the system was designed to allow the Defence Forces to continue operating while giving an individual time to recover.
Coolahan also said the vast majority of personnel do not end up being downgraded and losing their jobs. Her comments addressed one of the central concerns raised by the study: whether medical restrictions are understood by members as temporary safeguards or as a threat to their careers.
What happens next for Defence Forces mental health policy?
The committee heard competing perspectives on the scale of the problem. The research points to widespread concern among respondents, while Defence Forces representatives said the findings do not reflect their organisational experience.
Further consideration is likely to focus on how the medical grading system operates in practice, whether restrictions are reviewed consistently and how confidential support can be strengthened. The evidence may also contribute to discussions about:
- Clearer information for personnel about the consequences of disclosure.
- Regular reviews of medical classifications and recovery progress.
- Access to early psychological support before difficulties become acute.
- Measures to build confidence in confidentiality and career protection.
- Better evaluation of mental health programmes across the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps.
Because the survey was conducted during the pandemic, future research could also help establish whether attitudes have changed since then. Comparing current experiences with the study’s findings may give policymakers a clearer picture of present-day barriers.
Frequently asked questions
What did the Defence Forces study find?
The study found that 94 per cent of respondents believed disclosing a mental health issue could harm their career. Only 22 per cent said they would disclose a difficulty to seek medical support.
Who took part in the research?
The survey involved 687 serving members of Ireland’s Army, Naval Service and Air Corps.
What mental health indicators were reported?
The study reported suicidal thoughts among 34 per cent of respondents, previous self-harm among 10 per cent and a probable PTSD screening result among one quarter of respondents. Nine per cent reported a previous suicide attempt.
Does the Defence Forces accept the study’s conclusions?
Defence Forces representatives acknowledged the importance of reducing stigma but disputed the level of reluctance reported in the survey. They also said medical classification is intended to support recovery rather than punish personnel.
Why the findings matter
The debate goes beyond one survey. For any military organisation, confidence in medical support is closely linked to operational readiness, staff welfare and retention. If personnel fear that asking for help could end their careers, serious difficulties may remain hidden.
The central challenge now is to ensure that mental health support is viewed as a route to recovery rather than a professional liability. The Oireachtas committee’s consideration of the research provides an opportunity to examine whether existing safeguards are working as intended and whether Defence Forces members trust them.
This Breaking News Ireland story remains developing as the committee considers the evidence and the Defence Forces responds to concerns about mental health disclosure, medical grading and career security.