Political Violence and Disru of Moral y

posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; Fremont, 2004; Shaw, 2003). This research has demonstrated that risks increase when the violence is proximal, intense, and chronic. Conversely, the meanings that children attribute to violence can act as a protec-Pennebaker & Seagal, 1999). Although such strategies may be adaptive in the short term, it is unknown whether children are capable of leaving awful experiences behind or what conse-quences doing so may have for their future development. Thus, That there is wisdom in considering both risks and resilience when researching the impacts of war exposure does not, however,ª 2010, Copyright the Author(s) Journal Compilationª 2010, Society for Research in Child Development CHILD DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVEStive factor by rendering the violence justifiable. For example, Palestinian youth, who have available a wealth of religious and historical justifications for their engagement in political violence, display less psychological distress than Bosnian youth, who lack although it is undeniably important that we not overstate the vulnerabilities of war-affected youth, and essential—indeed, a matter of basic human rights—that we address their psychosocial needs fully and promptly, it is equally critical that we not overes-timate their resilience. An overly optimistic focus on resilience can unwittingly lead to overlooking what may be significant and enduring adverse psychological effects of war exposure (Betan