Background Various organizations, including the Armed Forces, regularly place their personnel into potentially traumatic environments. Exposure to such events can lead to the development of psychological distress and organizational inefficiencies. It follows that the Armed Forces need to consider how best to address and prevent trauma-related problems both from duty of care and organizational effectiveness viewpoints. Aim To investigate how Royal Navy personnel report they would deal with distress including the possibility of Deliberate Self-Harm (DSH) in peers. Methods In total, 142 interview transcripts were examined to see how military personnel would respond to a vignette which was concerned with how they would help a distressed peer. Interviews were analysed using content analysis and inclusive inductive categorization. Results The majority of individuals would interact positively with a peer who appeared to be ‘under stress’, and refer them on if problems did not resolve. Most respondents reported they would take positive action regarding immediate management of DSH, referring to either medical or management staff. The majority thought that reporting ideas of DSH would impact upon the potential harmer's career. Lower ranked personnel were more likely to report a negative impact. Conclusions The results are generally encouraging; the majority of those interviewed would actively involve themselves in the care of their peers and refer them on appropriately if the situation deteriorated. Most individuals interviewed saw DSH as a real, predominately medical problem that required immediate active intervention. However, many felt that help seeking could be detrimental to one's career within the services.