How Touch Supports Emotional Regulation

A child runs across the playground, tears streaming down their face as they clutch a grazed knee. A member of staff instinctively reaches out, ready to draw them close, to comfort and reassure. But as the child wraps their arms tightly around them, the adult freezes. A familiar inner voice whispers, “Is this okay? Is this allowed?”

They gently try to extricate themselves, offering kind words instead. The child sobs harder. In that moment, what should be a simple act of care becomes clouded by uncertainty and hesitation.

These small, human dilemmas play out daily in schools and across education settings around the world. For many practitioners, the question becomes less, “What does this child need from me right now?” and more, “Am I allowed to respond in the way my instincts tell me to?”

The cost of fear-based responses

“No-touch” or “zero-contact” policies originally emerged in many schools as well-intentioned attempts to safeguard children and protect staff. However, over time, fear-based responses have begun to replace confident, relational practice.

Staff often describe the quiet anxiety of second-guessing themselves: “Is it okay to hold a child’s hand?” “Can I put a reassuring hand on their shoulder?” or “Does this moment call for comfort or distance?”

In trying to eliminate risk, some settings have inadvertently removed an important part of how we communicate safety and support.

Fear-based practice does not equal safe practice.

The science of safety

Touch is one of the earliest ways humans communicate safety and connection. Safe, attuned contact supports emotional, social, and neurological development, helping children build trust and regulate their emotions.

Research shows that gentle, appropriate touch can increase oxytocin, the hormone linked with bonding, and reduce cortisol, our primary stress hormone. These changes help children feel calmer, safer, and more ready to engage.